What I Love About Far Cry 3

Sunsets and tigers, at the top of the list.

Far Cry 3 is a game of enormous juxtaposition. Overall it is undoubtedly an absolutely stunning game, ridiculously fun and utterly engrossing. And in there are some real extremes. I argue that Far Cry 3 contains some of the features for which we’ve spent our years screaming at the sky, a real understanding of why fun can be more worthwhile than realism, emergent play, and angry, angry tigers. And I also argue that Far Cry 3 contains some of the stupidest mistakes imaginable – in fact, beyond imaginable, because there’s no understandable way they could reach the finished game unless it were in fact coded by angry, angry tigers. I argue the first half of this below, with the second half tomorrow.

The problem with listing what a game gets wrong is it can start to look like an attack. I really don’t want to attack Far Cry 3, because I bloody love it. I’m the third person on RPS to report it’s caused them to stay up way past their bedtime, as it gobbles time and ensures there are always seven other things you need to do before you can stop. But of course there’s also that perennial issue with something when it’s great: the bad bits show up more. Like sneezed spaghetti on a Schelfhout painting, it’s all the more clear what shouldn’t be there. I wanted to put what’s wrong first, so I can finish on the positive. But it doesn’t work that way around. I can’t criticise the narrative before I’ve put that in context, for instance. So instead today I bring you what’s right with Far Cry 3, and tomorrow I’ll say what’s wrong with it.

What’s Right With Far Cry 3?

Clearly you need to go read Jim’s review if you haven’t. There’s no point in my repeating why it’s such an all-round successful game here, or I’d just be writing a review. So I want to pick out little details, the counterparts to those globules of spaghetti that make all the difference. It’s partly a passive-aggressive act – these are also the things I would lament other games not doing, and highlighting them here, hopefully it makes the point how important they are. And it’s partly because I like celebrating good stuff.

The Protagonist

I can see people immediately disagreeing here. I do too. I disagree with me on this one. And that’s not surprising, because the thumbnail of the story is slightly beyond problematic: a group of white kids land on an island of brown pirate savages and magical natives, who begin to celebrate/fear one of those white kids as this new force of mystical power to liberate/destroy them. That’s not exactly great. But then at the same time it can be read differently, and I think that while I recognise the former, this latter is my real experience. A group of wretched white rich kids arrive on an island for a holiday of self-indulgence and thrill-seeking, their fear of leaving adolescence exposed by their need to jump out of aeroplanes rather than move on with their lives, privilege protecting them from needing to be anything other than vacuous. But the island on which they’ve chosen to do this turns out to be lawless, and under the control of murderous pirates, and quickly their faux-idyllic lives are destroyed. Kidnapped, threatened, and beaten, a brutal reality instantly crushes them. And you, your character, he sees his own big brother murdered right next to him. He’s changed.

And yes, as Jim pointed out, there is a somewhat dramatic shift from the first time you stab a guy to kill him, to mowing down crowds with machine guns. It is jarring. But I also don’t know how they could have done it differently, without artificially limiting both your freedom and the game’s free-form fun – i.e. controlling how many people you encountered, and when you could shoot them. And Far Cry 3 absolutely isn’t Modern Warfare. But what’s really important here is that the change is recognised, and that’s almost unique among the murky world of FPS plotlines. Sure, the ordinary work-a-day chappie is thrown into the crazy situation, but I can’t think of many examples where other characters stop him hours in and say, “God man, you’re murdering loads of people. Why are you okay with that?” Even your character himself is torn by this, admittedly only in cutscenes, but in many ways that’s the point of the meta-commentary.

So while I can’t pretend the serious concerns aren’t serious concerns, either there’s more going on here or I’m a massive racist. Because as I play, what I experience is controlling someone whose entire life has fallen apart, who is experiencing the same sense of satisfaction and pleasure as I am when I successfully clear out an especially tricky enemy camp (read: kill lots of strangers), and who is being a hero after bring a prick. The locals on the island are the race they are because they’re, er, from that island. And the mystical voodoo bullshit? Well, it’s a crappy story element whether it’s playing into lazy racial tropes or not, but at least it’s an attempt to explain why I’m suddenly so much more brilliant than I was 20 hours ago.


Oh sweet merciful joy. You can run! Run! Run I tell you! Unlike every other game in the history of humanity, running a bit faster than a slow jog isn’t something that can only last for three seconds. And that’s not “every other game in the history of humanity” style exaggerating. Literally, three seconds – that’s what most games give you to run faster before your character becomes a doubled-over, heaving wreck. Even I – an unpleasantly lazy blob – can run for more than three seconds without having a heart attack. Maybe even seven. But here this fit young man can run indefinitely, because FIT YOUNG PEOPLE CAN RUN A REALLY LONG WAY. There are even perks to allow yourself to reload a gun while running. Goodness me, what a massive difference this makes.


Like the hum of an air conditioner in an assembly hall, the problem with every other game’s diving wasn’t something I noticed until it went away. When you jump into water in Far Cry 3, you keep going down for a bit. Like, jumping into water. Every other game has you remarkably buoyant, but Far Cry 3 has plunge. You plunge in, and you have that odd moment where you feel like you need to stop going down now please. Diving is also absolutely splendidly realised, and something well worth doing off the side of a waterfall. Oh yes, you can dive off waterfalls.


I know most of the internet disagrees with me, but there’s a good looking section that’s on my side about wanting games that let you feel more powerful the more you play. Games that actually let you get better, such that they get almost slightly easier the more you play. Games that get more interesting instead of more difficult. If there’s one game that broke that rule to its own devastating shame, it was Just Cause 2. The constant ramping up of the opponents meant there was never a moment of feeling like you were becoming the world’s best. And of course the nature of RPGs and MMOs is to scale the world around you, if not just make later sections level off any improvements you’ve made to yourself. Midway through Far Cry 3, no such thing is happening. I’m getting incredibly powerful, and while the world is constantly getting more interesting, I’m getting markedly better. I’m so much more skilled at clearing out an enemy village now, with far more abilities and weapons, and it’s great! I get to feel great! It’s not scaling to keep me in my place, remind me that I’m a hamster in a wheel. What a real pleasure.


I’ve never played a hunting game. Not even to see if they’re as horrible as I imagine they are. And I’ve certainly absolutely no desire whatsoever to actually go hunting. I went fishing once, and it felt like a warcrime. I’ll have my animals arrive magically dead in packaging, thanks. But wow, I’m loving the hunting in Far Cry 3. I’m loving it partly for the reasons I fear I’d probably actually find enjoyable about a good hunting sim – the thrill of the chase, the successful aim, the application of reflexes and skill – and partly because it’s so damned wrong. Chasing bears through the jungle with a bow and arrow is ridiculous. Being chased by bears through the jungle is hilarious. Having my ankles brutally bitten by komodo dragons is terrifying. And shooting wild dogs is about as heinous as I’ve felt when playing a game.

Most of all, it’s the killing endangered species. It’s dirty, it’s wrong, it’s morbid. It’s very exciting! Tigers are real bastards when they decide you’re food, and also they make for lovely purses. That’s I think my favourite aspect of it, when combined with the game’s crafting. I NEED to kill that incredibly rare leopard! It’s the only way I can make a bigger backpack to carry my inane shit in! I’ve turned into a 1970s lady with an arctic fox slung around her neck. “I needed it to die, for otherwise my neck would get a frightful chill.” So I’m pootling around in boats, killing anyone with red clothes on for sport, waiting for sharks to turn up, because my wallet has run out of space for money. Just take that sentence in. It’s hideous. It’s glorious. What have we become?

Although it’s funny how functional it is for me. When shark hunting I was swimming in a gorgeous lagoon, and spotted a vast manta ray. It was beautiful, and I swam underwater with it, us both flitting about, neither threatening nor threatened by the other. And then I got on my boat and shot it to death, to see if it could be made into anything. And it couldn’t. It was just a dead manta ray lying on the bottom of the sea. And I felt gruesome. It really got to me. Fuck those sharks – they’re holding my many, many dollars together. But that ray? He didn’t have any reason to die. I’m sad about the manta ray.

And those tigers. I never want to kill the tigers. They’re so magnificent. And there is nothing better in all of gaming than deliberately causing one to enter an enemy village and kill the lot of them. The game still recognises it as a victory to you, but it was all the tiger. Gosh, those are the best moments. I can’t not sit back in my chair, put my arms in the air, and shout, “TIGER WIN!” The problem is, they also want to eat me, and it really is self-defense when I blow their brains out.


When it wants to be Tomb Raider, it manages to be Tomb Raider. Huge temple interiors, difficult almost platforming paths to find, hidden secrets, and ancient artifacts. And when it wants to be Just Cause 2, it delivers it. Ridiculous supplies of vehicles and ammo, huge explosions to trigger, large-scale chases, and paragliding onto the roofs of buildings. If it chooses to be a cover-based corridor shooter for a short while, then it absolutely provides that superbly, with enemy AI that doesn’t just pop up where it ducked down, and excellent indication of your visibility. When it wants to be an open-world, emergent battle (which it opts for most of the time) then it doesn’t fuss you, try to control you, lets you approach a situation as you see fit. And if that makes it incredibly easy or ludicrously difficult, because of your actions, it allows it.

Missions let it comfortably wander into the realms of Uncharted, while there are oddly personal interactions that give it a feeling of Skyrim. And it does all these things without ever forgetting that it’s a giant fun machine, for churning out fun and not pissing you around.

There’s so much more I find myself wanting to celebrate about this one. I want to champion the extraordinary nature of the exploration, rewarding you for going far, far off track with ancient ruins, expansive caves, amazing waterfalls leading into crystal-blue pools, crashed aircraft at the bottom of the sea, or perhaps best of all, a hangglider at the top of the highest mountains, letting you take it all in as you float back down. But I have to stop somewhere, or the internet gets too slow. Tomorrow, the negatives.


  1. Ross Angus says:

    Yes, but can you pet the tigers, like in the new Ass Creed?

    Plus, let’s not forget Rab’s hunting game review. He was doing this back in 2005.

    • Timthos says:

      I tried petting a dog once in AC3. Connor stabbed him through the head instead. I think I hit the wrong button.

      • olemars says:

        Hope you remembered to skin it. Your ancestor skinned all domestic pets he assassinated.

    • DrunkDog says:

      No, you absolutely bloody can’t. I do find that the flamethrower is devastatingly effective for taking beasts down though. I mean you feel like an absolute shit for doing it, but it’s quick and you have the advantage of leaving an impromptu barbecue selection for the locals.

  2. Fallward says:

    I basically agree with all of these positives after finishing the game. However, i expect the negatives to outweigh them 10 to 1. No matter how many good aspects there are to the game, you cannot justify the game being ultimately terrible.

    • John Walker says:

      You finished an “ultimately terrible” game? One that takes very many hours to just get through the main quest, let alone play most of the game?

      • hemmingjay says:

        Ugh, don’t waste anymore oxygen trying to reason with someone like that. I suspect he has not played anywhere near the whole game and possibly not at all. Thanks for a thorough review that I found to be on point AND entertaining.

        PS Who plays 20 hrs in a “ultimately terrible” game? Tis the season Trollololol!

        • Marik Bentusi says:

          Play it for a few hours and stop -> You don’t know what you’re talking about
          Play it till the end -> You’re either stupid or don’t want to admit it’s actually good

          Personally I was hoping some of the good bits would get to shine later on, and there were always those hints that they might… but after Vaas I just found myself unable to care about anything that was left. When I found myself utterly bored by the giant boss that goes down in like 5+10 hits on hard, I realized just what the hell I had been doing (and not doing) all those hours.

          I liked the bit of the introductory cutscene between the camera video and the tutorial tho, I felt like it fleshed out the mess you’re in very well and gave you an urge to start playing and getting out of said mess.

          • Celt says:

            I played it through to completion (I’m a completionist) and ultimately adjudged it to be a failed game, lesser than the sum of its parts. It took all the good things from FC2 and either removed or toned them down, and swung too far the opposite way on things it had done wrong.

        • aepervius says:

          “PS Who plays 20 hrs in a “ultimately terrible” game? Tis the season Trollololol!” people who want to see the ending, people who hopes the fun is yet to come and want to give them game a full fair test, people who can’t get their money back, etc…etc… Because *YOU* would not, does not mean it is a stupid things to do or trolling.

          • Isair says:

            Yes, it does. If you consider the first 19 hours of a game terrible, but somehow think the 20th hour will be great, then clearly you’re too stupid to learn from past experiences.

            “Did I ever tell you the definition of insanity?”

      • Buttless Boy says:

        I’ve never understood this argument that because someone spent a lot of time doing something, they must have enjoyed it and/or felt it was worth doing. I’ve spent days watching shitty anime, spent weeks talking myself out of important life decisions, and I’ve played hundreds of hours of games I despise. I’ve probably spent more time doing pointless shit I hate than doing productive things I enjoy. I have too much free time and I’m perfectly capable of wasting it.

        (that said I haven’t played FC3 and fully expect to enjoy it, so I dunno what that guy’s deal is)

        • Kieron Gillen says:

          Yeah, but it didn’t make you want to tear your eyes out in the first five minutes, which implies it can’t be that terrible. Lacking, flawed, empty, etc. But when there’s games that are unbearable for even a couple of minutes, if you’ve got 20 hours out of something has to say there’s something there.

          • Buttless Boy says:

            I don’t think I’ve ever played a video game I hated that much… Maybe that’s my problem. Anyone got any suggestions?

          • dubusadus says:

            There are plenty of things that people finish that start out terrible and continue being terrible. You have a history of championing games as an experience, as a new medium for story telling and here you are questioning someone for finishing a 20+ hour game that they found terrible. Unless you’re judging him personally for not prioritizing his time, I have to say that there are plenty of us who finish terrible books and movies because maybe our friends have, because we want to see what the hype was about, because we want to understand where the genre is headed, because we see critical reviews of it that build it up onto impossible pedestals as if that will preempt outside, ‘anti-art’ attacks, because we have a tick that has us finishing things to 100%, even if it’s a grind.

            Games are not a luxury, right? They are a medium by which art and themes and stories are expressed. It’d be nice of the original commenter had offered actual criticisms instead of a generalization but to attack them for finishing a game is weirdly hypocritical. I get that you guys are close friends and all that but don’t be so casually dismissive of your audience.

          • Juan Carlo says:

            You’re underestimating the awesome power of mental illness. When I start a game I absolutely must finish it or I can’t start the next one. Even if the game totally sucks, I’ll still power through. I’ve tried abandoning the game to start a new one, but I feel a weird itch in my brain the whole time……like I’m missing something. So I always go back and finish it.

            Yeah, my life sucks.

          • f1x says:

            I suffer from the same syndrome, it just extends also to Movies and Books, if I start one I have to finish it,

            but last week I dropped a book because I just couldnt go on, so guess I’m getting old :p

          • Howard says:

            Utterly untrue, Kieron, especially with this game. While the open-world side of the game is great fun and 50+ hours of fun can indeed be had simply romping around, hunting, doing side quests and free villages, the “Main Quest” is singularly the worst example of gaming I have ever seen. The writing is piffle beyond measure and the MASSIVE overuse of QTE, forced cut-scenes, boss-fights and the utterly tedious dream-state bullshit have literally had me crying out in frustration but the moment I am set free upon the island again, I soon forget the idiocy I just had to suffer through.

            As a playground, far Cry 3 is fantastic, as a narrative story it is utter and complete dross but unfortunately you have to suffer through the inane hackery in order to unlock the interesting stuff and as a result, I doubt I will ever replay this even though I will have put a great deal of time into it by the time I finish.

          • Baboonanza says:

            Oh, the joy of being a video game reviewer!

        • Archonsod says:

          If an individual voluntarily sacrifices twenty hours of their free time to do something they don’t enjoy then either a) they’re lying, or b) they’re some kind of deranged masochist. In either case the validity of their opinion is somewhat questionable.

          • Buttless Boy says:

            It’s probably best that you question my opinion anyway, ’cause I never do.

          • Fallward says:

            I’m touched that you all felt the need to reply to my opinion. I’m also dismayed that you you’ve all jumped on me like a rapist because i felt that way. To those who said ‘he must be lying if he said he’s finished it despite thinking it’s terrible’, well… i did finish it. Why? Because i thought the same of Far Cry 1, then the monsters came along and changed it all for the better. I was waiting for something like that, that’s why i finished it. No doubt, it never came – so in the end i was able to judge the game as a whole ‘ultimately terrible’. The only reason i continued forcing myself through the less than mediocre campaign is because i anticipated a twist. Does that make sense? Am i not allowed to do something i don’t enjoy? Get the pole out of your collective ass and leave me to my opinion. Maybe someone would have read my comment and thanked me for saving them from coming to the drawn out conclusion themselves.

            P.S 20 hours? What?? It took 3 hours to craft the necessities, realise that exploring the island is pointless (including camps and towers), then begin rushing the main story. It then took another 5 hours to complete. 20 hours you’re joking – that’s for games like Skyrim which reward you for exploring.

          • malkav11 says:

            Well, I will give you credit for being the first person I literally have ever seen or heard describe the monsters in Far Cry 1 as redeeming the game rather than being where the game jumped the shark. (I confess I never got that far, but I’ve never objected to the concept.)

          • Gorf says:

            So you finished the game in super quick time? If thats the case then youve completely missed the point, which is strange seeing as youve mentioned how Skyrim rewards you for exploration, and the Island in FC3 is (IMO) the main character of the game. Unless you mean that Skyrim rewards you with more quests for exploring and FC3 doesnt? In which case its a bad game to compare it to because FC3 is EXCACTLY the game it should be.

            It also succeeds in satisfying combat, decent gunplay and a whole host of different melee takedowns if you feel like being a ninja (Death from above/below, chaining together knife takedowns, pulling pins from enemies grenades, meat sheilds etc etc).

            I’m looking forward to crawling through, under, and over every inch of that gorgeous island. When I’m just exploring around finding temples, caves and bunkers it reminds me of the Island on the show Lost, and when I’m crawling through the jungle hitting bases at night and it starts pouring with rain, it feels like I’m a sniper on a mission during the Vietnam War lol. I totally forget about the main storyline, which I’m actually really enjoying anyway.

            And BTW are you serious about FC1 getting better when the monsters started appearing? Its universally accepted that was the point it turned shit, but whatever.

          • Greg says:

            I’m not saying you have peculiar tastes, but I loved Far Cry 1 up until the monsters and then I just couldn’t take it anymore so I quit. It was one of the most ridiculous things I’ve encountered in a game that had up until then been one of the most engrossing experiences I’ve had in a video game.

          • drewski says:

            I have an entire huge sandbox in which to do whatever I want, but that’s all crap so I’m going to ignore it and push through the story as fast as I can, even though it’s terrible.

            I mean, each to their own, but *why*?

          • El_Emmental says:

            Catch-22 situation.

            a – Do not enjoy the game -> do not play it until the end -> “you haven’t played the game enough to enjoy it, you can’t have a honest opinion with just an incomplete playthrough”

            b – Do not enjoy the game -> play it until the end -> lol liar / why would you do that / you actually enjoyed it otherwise you wouldn’t have played it for so long (so we would have been able to throw the “you haven’t even played the whole game” card at you)

            There’s more than pure, simple (dumb) entertainment to video games (or any other medium).

            Sometime you need to go through unpleasant moments to later enjoy. Sometime people will accept to deal with flaws, waiting for positive aspects later in the game.

            I didn’t like the beginning of Trials 2, still finished it (= completing all levels, not 100%ing all achiev/special levels), finally enjoyed the experience *as a whole*, but will never play it again (anytime soon).

            I didn’t like some parts of HL2, but made the effort and finished it (along with the episodes). I’m glad I did, some few other parts were really good.

            Stuck and bored out of Metroid Prime, left it on pause. Resumed playing it, forced me to go through the first 45 minutes, enjoyed it later in the game.

            Found “The Plague” in my parents attics, started reading it. It started okay, then turned into torpor, drowsiness, I thought the book was progressively burying me into quicksand of nothing-happening, a true sight of despair… almost gave up, but I soldiered on, and boy it paid off in the end. That difficulty to carry on was -exactly- what the book was about.

            If someone tell me that they didn’t like something, and made the effort of going through it (even if they didn’t fooled around the sidequests/side activities), hell it means they made their homework and aren’t entirely talking out of the butt.

            Maybe, just maybe, Far Cry 3 isn’t an universal video games that will please all the men and women in the world, leaving them gazing in the sky with a candid smile on their face. It’s ok, not your fault.

      • LennyLeonardo says:

        Dear John. If I was being pedantic and/or facetious I would say that “ultimately” could mean “in the end”, and so the OP was only made aware of the terribleness at the end of the playthrough.

        But does that mean that the actual time spent playing was worthwhile, despite the late realisation of terribleitude? Or does it mean that the subject was in denial about terriblosity throughout and did not actually enjoy any of the preceding play? More tests must be done.

        I for one intend to enjoy the game regardless of quality, because I am mad.

        • LostInDaJungle says:

          Lady 1: The food here is terrible! It’s inedible!
          Lady 2: You’re right, and the portions are too small!

    • luukdeman111 says:

      You sound like one of those 0 reviews on metacritic:

      The game is absolutely brilliant in some places but overall it sucks… 0/10…..

      That’s not very helpful to anyone…

    • Scissors says:

      That is just wrong. You might find the game mediocre for whatever reason (like being allergic to shrubbery or islands in general) but to say it is terrible is just silly. Oh, and finishing this rather massive game by now either means you have been playing (literally) non stop or you are one of those guys that complained about Dishonored being 4 hours of gameplay.

    • MikoSquiz says:

      I hated the last one – because it was terrible – but I’m loving the third so far.

      However, looking at the sheer amount of stuff yet undone fills me with dismay. I have 112 more relics to hunt down? Really? And 30 more enemy encampments? Are you kidding? I don’t have that many hundred hours of time to kill, and even if I did I’d probably be heartily sick of the game by halfway through. I like eating a slice of cake. I don’t like eating ten cakes.

      • ulix says:

        How about one slice every day, or every two days?

      • Tomba says:

        How about if you don’t want to find 112 relics, you just don’t go look for them? I’ve never understood what strange kind of gamer gets enjoyment out of finding hundreds of feathers, film rolls, grafitti tags,… for no reason whatsoever except a counter going up…

        The enemy camps are not in that category because they actually make a difference in the game, and each one can be cleared in other ways. I think I might even be sad I can’t clear anymore camps when they’re all done.

        • Archonsod says:

          Indeed, it’s worth noting that the skill unlocks dependent on such things as finding relics or completing specific missions have their threshold set incredibly low ( 3 or 6 IIRC), to the point you’re almost half way there by the time the tutorial finishes.

        • Arren says:

          A thousand times this. Increment as entertainment — proving that banality in games is by no means limited to MMO hamster-wheels.

        • MikoSquiz says:

          But there’s one right there, etc. I’d prefer just to have less padded games. You can always do-over if you want more.

        • yourgrandma says:

          Relics unlock some overpowered weapons so it is totally worth finding them.

          • colw00t says:

            Relics unlock a fancy weapon, but you only need to find, like, ten of them to get it. And they’re pretty easy to find, especially since relics produce an audible cue when you’re nearby.

            If memory serves you get “signature weapon” unlocks at 10 of 120 relics, 5 of 20 letters, and 10 of 20 memory cards. The memory cards you get for free as you take over outposts anyway. Finding the rest just fills out your tattoo and fills the bar. The handbook will explictly note where the rewards are if you want to stop. The signature weapons aren’t really overpowered, just versions of guns that have more attachments than usual. And an ugly paint job.

          • Archonsod says:

            And if you really can’t be bothered, you can buy a map showing you the location of all the collectables in each region.

          • yourgrandma says:

            The AMR is definitely overpowered. Basically one hit anything in the game including vehicles.

    • Gorf says:

      tbh Iam curious as to what……. “stupidest mistakes imaginable – in fact, beyond imaginable”, are going to be.
      I’m 20 hours or so in and havent found anything wrong so far, and I’m a cynical miserable fucker.

      • Gorf says:

        Yeah excactly, if I had to find something “wrong”, it would be the need to position yourself just right when looting bodies as to not swap weapons instead, and the menu transitions not being that efficient, (and the other things you mention).
        On the other hand I’m only about half way through so there may be some non game mechanics related issues later on in the game?

      • yurusei says:

        Perhaps the fact that you need to unload 2 full clips to drop a tiger would be considered a stupid mistake beyond imagining.

        • Premium User Badge

          phuzz says:

          You don’t really need to imagine it, it’s basically the same mechanism used by every other game, ie each enemy type has an arbitrary number of hit points, which increases according to their perceived dangerousness.
          In fact, I’m sure you could write a list of how scared the designers wanted you to be of each enemy, based on how many bullets it takes to kill each one.

      • Love Albatross says:

        There are some incredibly stupid problems with Far Cry 3, but it’s nice for you that you haven’t noticed them. Have a list:

        (Disclaimer: I am mostly loving this game, it’s 95% awesome)

        – The UI was created by a sadist. You have to hold E to activate things, which is dumb, and the inventory is a horror show. There’s no button to open up crafting or skills menus so you have to go in via Esc, which is not only immersion-breaking but Esc is also used to dismiss notification messages, so in the heat of battle you sometimes have to click through a ton of pointless tips before you can craft a syringe.

        – Constant annoying notifications. I don’t care if there is a mission waiting, it’s a free roaming immersive sim! If I want to play the mission I will fucking walk over there, stop telling me about it.

        – The save system is shit. Unless you remember to go into the menu and click save you can lose a ton of progress (including crafted items and animal skins).

        – Some missions are activated by walking into a certain area. Which is incredibly annoying when you were going there for another reason.

        – Lots of the side missions are utterly crap. Tons of crying old ladies whiny about cheating husbands or some nonsense, and they involve nothing other than walking over to a certain point and performing a single action. Terrible.

        – Also on the ‘E’ button point, holding E both swaps weapons AND loots bodies which is dumb when weapons are often right next to bodies.

        – The sweet spot for looting bodies is ridiculously precise. This is stupid, why wasn’t it noticed in playtesting?

        – You can only mantle at very specific points. I can run for an infinite amount of time around the island but can’t scramble up a rock?

        – Can’t drag bodies. The stealth is almost perfect but this flaw comes close to ruining the entire thing. (And yes I know there is a perk to drag bodies but it can only be used when you’ve stabbed someone).

        – Another stealth problem; enemies seem to know where a shot came from when using silenced weapons. They run straight toward you as soon as their friends go down.

        – Can walk over ammo to pick it up, but not money.

        – You get access to too many weapons at the very beginning. Rather than getting free guns for activating radio towers, this should have simply unlocked the ability to purchase certain weapons from vendors, which makes far more sense and means you can’t simply buy your way into the best guns right from the start.

        • LostInDaJungle says:

          Hmmm, silenced weapons work like a champ for me. Just last night I thought… “Hey, if I take out the sniper on the far side of the camp, will they start looking for me over there?” The answer was yes. Shot the guy on the far side of the camp and was treated to everyone showing me the back of their head for me to put a bullet in. I’ve been taking out entire outposts unseen just by sniping and moving with my silenced sniper rifle.

        • colw00t says:

          The enemies are dumb but they are smart enough to work out that if one of their friends just fell over in a certain direction and they didn’t see anything, they should probably go look for snipers in the general direction opposite where their guy fell. You can take a shot or two and then shift positions, because it takes them a little bit to figure out where the shot came from. You call that broken, but I call that stealth working properly. A suppressor does not make you an invisible thunder god.

          I could get really nerdy and point out that just because you have a suppressor on your sniper rifle doesn’t make it silent. Just quieter.

    • njolnin says:

      If I may ask, what did you not like about the game? I don’t think others are right to criticize you for finishing the game, but your original post needs more explanation. If you basically agree with the many positive points the article talks about, there would need to be some serious flaws for it to be a terrible game. I think that not mentioning them has invited this criticism. You are, of course, always entitled to dislike a game, no matter how much others enjoy it, but people may think you’re only trying to be antagonistic without first discussing why.

  3. simulant says:

    As pretty as Far Cry 3 can be, the plot will make you lose IQ points. It is stupid to the point of being offensive.

    I’m amazed that more reviewers aren’t bitching about it. Please raise your (and our) standards.

    Far Cry 3’s story line feels like it was written for or by the guy who calls you “faggot” every time you kill him in any online shooter.

    And then there’s the whole hunting for pelts thing….. is it really that enjoyable killing animal after animal to create larger bags for your stuff? And why when you skin the animals does it look like you are just stuffing their guts into a bag…. their corpses remain fully skinned. I am losing sleep at night over all that wasted meat.

    • emorium says:

      Maybe i’ve been spoiled by Spec Ops but i agree that the plot needed some work. They kept emphasizing this concept of insanity but in the end it was basically a couple of cutscenes where you’re hallucinating due to drugs, not losing your mind. Also, i wanted more Vaas in my game. Damn that was a fun villain. A shame they basically treated him like a stepping stone.

      Edit: And yes, it was fun to kill animals for pelts. It was probably the first game where i actually enjoyed crafting. Probably because it had few reagents and you got those easily if you just looked for them. Not by hoping the next dungeon would have them.

      • John Connor says:

        Far Cry 3’s story shares more with Spec Ops than you think. I’m stealing this from something I wrote on another site.


        You don’t really meet any of Jason’s friends until you’ve saved them from the pirates. Until that point they only really exist as a goal to work towards. You and Jason are driven by the “goal”; save your friends.

        When you finally meet them, you are disappointed to discover they are dudebros. They are the exact opposite of the gamer, you. The thing is, Jason is disappointed too He is realizing how bored he was of his previous life, you and Jason are having a great time on the island, and neither of you want to go back.

        A fair bit later there is a great exchange Jason has with the blonde chick who repairs the boat. He asks her what it’s like to win her swimming championships, and she explains it felt like she was in control, like the whole world existed for her. Sound familiar?

        Jason then tells her that’s what it feels like to him, when he kills someone. He says it feels like winning. At that point you realize that Jason is turning into you, the gamer, the one who revels in murder and violence and hates dudebros.

        Then you see the look on her face. She thinks Jason has gone insane.

        And she’s right.

        The island is a total fucking nightmare of a place. It is hell on Earth. Anyone with their right mind is desperate to leave. Yet for you, the “gamer”, it is a playground of glorious, gratuitous violence. The more Jason becomes like the gamer, the further he loses his grip on sanity, on empathy, on reality. All he wants to do is kill the bad guys because, in his words, “I’m good at it.” He wants to win the game.

        Let’s not forget Vaas’ definition of insanity. Played a round-based shooter lately?

        That’s what Far Cry 3 is about. I think it’s brilliant.

    • coffeetable says:

      There is an argument to be made – an argument of possibly dubious quality – that FC3’s plot is a subtle send up of gamer wish-fulfillment.

      I mean think about it: rich white manchild whose girlfriend despairs about his inability to do anything but play games (a point revealed very late on) takes a dare-devil holiday to a tropical island where he saves his friends, becomes the magical hero of the natives and captures the affection of the beautiful priestess.

      It’s exactly the plot a basement-dwelling teenager would write.

      The biggest point in favour of this interpretation (aside from my inability to believe someone would write White Man’s Burden: The Game in this day and age) is the ending. Spoilers: you can either free your friends and walk away from your god-life or kill your friends and then be murdered yourself. It’s so fantastically out of odds with the rest of the plot that I couldn’t help but laugh.

      Personally, I’m not decided. Right now I’m siding with “awful writing”, but if the authors came out and claimed otherwise it wouldn’t take much to convince me.

      Also writing aside the voice acting of the main characters is /fantastic/ and of a quality I haven’t seen in any other game.

      • simulant says:

        “Also writing aside the voice acting of the main characters is /fantastic/ and of a quality I haven’t seen in any other game.”

        Try the Enhanced version of “The Witcher 2”. I ‘m extremely impressed by the quality of writing and voice acting in that game. Every single conversation is voiced which is pretty amazing considering the size of the game.. Granted, it’s the first game I’ve played with 3D glasses so maybe that has skewed my opinion some… but I highly recommend it if you like RPGs.

      • MikoSquiz says:

        I don’t think ‘writing’ is so much the issue. Game writers are often brought on at a very late stage, after the plot is pretty much done, the sets are constructed, the characters are modeled, and so forth; I’m assuming that’s what happened here. The actual writing is very solid work, but I assume it was done after the events were already set in stone, just before the lines were recorded.

      • Xantonze says:


        I totally agree with your interpretation: it’s not so much a game plot about madness than a madly stupid plot, and I love it for that.
        Plus, the “gamer” theory is valid, I think. Remember at the ending:


        you gut the girl, get the girl, the girl guts you, and says “Jason, YOU WON”!!!
        Awesome game.

        (END OF SPOILER)

        Only regret: for the GOTY edition, drop the arch enemy and the aussie, and more VAAS instead please!!!

  4. coffeetable says:

    I killed a Galapagos tortoise. It’s shell doesn’t seem to be used for anything.

    I felt bad.

    • Gorf says:

      I felt bad about putting an arrow through a bird of paradise :(

  5. Stupoider says:

    “Skyrim with guns” is a label that’s been floating around for a few days now, how does it hold up? Because that’s enough to put me off playing it.

    • John Walker says:

      That would be about the most inept description I could imagine.

      • lokimotive says:

        Is it as inept as calling Pathologic “Oblivion with Cancer”?

        • Kieron Gillen says:

          Back in the day, there were a bunch of people who were outraged by Charlie Brooker’s description of Carmageddon 2 as “Pornography for Anarchists”. They were basically boring, unimaginative and tediously over-literal people.

          Just suddenly came to mind.

        • John Walker says:

          You understand that my point is that it would be a wholly inaccurate way to sum up Far Cry 3, right?

          Thanks for remembering my Pathologic review! And I’m still very pleased to have come up with that description. I think it applies very well, clearly as a metaphor, and of course was part of a sentence, a comment on the game’s nature, and obviously not a statement that was designed to wholly explain the game.

    • WoundedBum says:

      It’s not Skyrim with guns in that it has conversations or dragons or anything of that nature, just that it has an open world where the best stories come from crazy stuff that happens because that’s the way the game panned out rather than being scripted like that.

      It’s also not at all clunky like Skyrim.

    • -Spooky- says:

      “Just Cause 2 in First Person”, not Skyrim. :)

      • Xzi says:

        That’s the first thing that came to mind for me when reading about it and/or watching gameplay videos. Only I feel that JC2 is closer to my idea of a good time. In neither game does the storyline interest me much at all, but the freedom of movement and do whatever-the-hell you want seems to be greater in JC2 right from the get-go.

    • HadToLogin says:

      It’s quite accurate. Most FC3 quests are on same level as Skyrim quests: “go there, fetch/kill that” (unlike Skyrim, doesn’t have “and come back for reward”, which is actually nice), there’s tons of exploration to be done, there’s no big problem getting all those skills (hell, it’s an achievement), there are some other stuff to do in case you doesn’t feel you want to kill another pirates or animals (playing poker, and exploring, and that’s really enough to spent few hours without killing anyone). And there’s bow, in case you’ll be bored with guns.

    • MikoSquiz says:

      It did spontaneously occur to me as well. There’s minor differences (such as, oh, no quest log, no quest chains, no character creation) but it is a game of freeform wilderness exploration and killing bad guys in dungeons of sorts, with gathering of perks and equipment, and feels remarkably similar.

      Except the execution is much smoother. As much as I enjoyed Skyrim, you can’t really claim that it does things like moving around, fighting, or crafting well. The big picture is gorgeous but the details are all lumpy, because it’s an Elder Scrolls game.

      • Xzi says:

        Well then, they’d be on equal footing if you could mod Far Cry 3 as extensively as you can Skyrim. That’s the main reason why many Bethesda games continue to be worth purchasing.

        • MikoSquiz says:

          You know, I did eventually put All The Mods on Skyrim, and apart from shinier graphics they mostly don’t seem to add that much. You certainly can’t make the combat, etc more entertaining after the fact, the engine won’t allow it. I’d love to be proved wrong.

          • Xzi says:

            link to skyrim.nexusmods.com

            There are a number of overhaul mods not listed in that section which change combat significantly as well. The combat in Skyrim isn’t bad as a baseline to start with, but it definitely needs some tweaking to become any kind of challenging or interesting.

            I’m liking Skyrim Redone (SkyRe) quite a bit so far:

            link to skyrim.nexusmods.com

            A little excerpt from the combat section of the mod: “Combat in vanilla Skyrim basically consisted of spamming power attacks with an “Absorb Stamina” enchantment or vegetable soup. No tactic was required, and stamina did virtually nothing.

            Thus, I decided to make a new combat system that heavily relies on stamina and forces you to use more tactic, especially when using the other enemy boosting modules EnemyAI, EnemyScaling and EncounterZones.

            All changes apply to all actors; they dynamically spread as you approach someone.”

          • Stupoider says:

            Call me old fashioned but I don’t buy half baked games just for the community to do all the work the developers were too naff to accomplish.

          • Xzi says:

            Well you’re probably buying nothing from the AAA scene, then.

            Besides, the community only does the work that some of the community wants to see done. I’m sure there are plenty of people out there that have been perfectly satisfied after finishing vanilla Skyrim. For those of us who hold our games to a higher standard, however, there have always been mods.

            Some of the Freelancer mods out there still make me jizz in my pants.

    • Timthos says:

      I don’t see how anyone can describe FC3 as “Skyrim with guns” when there are already two games that are actually designed as Elder Scrolls games with guns.

      • HadToLogin says:

        Fallout3 is Oblivion with guns. New Vegas is not Elder Scrolls. Unlike ES, it have story, characters and decisions other then “what to use to kill this dragon”.

    • neofit says:

      Nothing to do with Skyrim. With the abysmal save (and mostly load) checkpoint system and and virtually zero persistence, it is more like “GTA in a jungle”. Skyrim feels like a world, this one feels like a series of slightly related play sessions.

  6. popej says:

    It’s good, it’s fun, it’s ludicrous, it’s often hilarious and it is worth the money.

    I just wish it wasn’t so easy, and I wish the HUD would leave me alone.

    • ulix says:

      The HUD can be annoying.
      And some of the bigger animals, which are basically bullet-sponges.
      Why do I need 40 SMG bullets to kill a cow? Why can a tiger take 20 bullets to the head?

      That really is my greatest criticism of the game (so far, about 1/4 done I’d guess). Human enemies usually die “realistically” (one bullet to the head should be enough), while a tiger only dies when it has more lead than blood in its body.

      • Brun says:

        Probably because SMGs are low-caliber weapons, thus they aren’t doing much damage.

        When people go out and hunt game – especially dangerous animals like Bears, Elephants, or Big Cats – they don’t use things like pistols or TEC-9s. They use high-powered rifles. There is a reason for this. That reason is that you want your prey to die in a single shot, so that it cannot get pissed off and attack you.

  7. Belsameth says:

    Oh the Tigers! I hate them and love them. The former mostly because they always show up when sneaking up on a base and they require *A FULL MAG* from an assault rifle to take down…

    • Gorf says:

      animal reppelant works better.

    • Derppy says:

      Use the bow, with the reload speed perk and red dot sight it’s pretty much the best weapon in the game. You can eliminate a tiger with 3 arrows before it even charges you and you’ll get all the arrows back.

      It’s also completely silent, kills most enemies in one shot and makes you feel like a total badass.

      Pretty much the only time I use anything else is when I’m taking enemies out from long range (silenced bolt-action sniper) or if I’m just goofing around after being detected (usually I just kill myself, because I feel like I’ve failed if I get detected)

      So far I’ve spent most of my time just capturing radio towers, liberating enemy camps undetected and hunting to craft the best gear. I’ve done only a handful of story missions (up to the point where most skills unlock) and then just the path of the hunter quests. So, majority of the story, almost all the side missions and plenty of other activities yet to be experienced, but I already feel the game was more than worth the money.

      Probably my game of the year and ranks pretty high in all the games I’ve ever played. Recommended to anyone who likes open-world games.

      • Archonsod says:

        Actually the flamethrower is the better option. Once ignited the tiger will not attack, and instead run off in a panic. When it finally succumbs, it’ll set fire to wherever it’s smouldering remains land.

        As a bonus it actually makes the heroic reputation your character builds make a little more sense. You don’t muck around with someone who can clear out a base by chucking burning leopards at it.

        • Dahoon says:


        • Belsameth says:

          That made me spill my coffee :(

          I’ve not got the bow perks yet. Did get the unique SMG tho, and that does the job too. Too lazy to craft anything but health stims so far. (and all gear upgrades, obviously…)

  8. Totally heterosexual says:

    Ok fine I will get it. On the consolebox though since my comp is running on steampunk gears right now.

    Also I still want to know if the tribal lady gets naked :(

    …or Vaas. That would be fine too.

    • emorium says:

      She gets semi-naked but still. 9/10, maybe more if she changed that mohawk.

      Also there’s a certain hallucination where Vaas and her swap models constantly while pole-dancing. Would probably interest you.

      • Totally heterosexual says:


        No wait im late for that. Brb running trough a blizzard to the game store.

  9. caddyB says:

    Shit… I have to buy this now.

  10. Scissors says:

    Oh, anyone else have a secret wish that Sitra exists? I hope the devs had a moment of 0% imagination and modelled her after some girl that exists, she is almost too sexy.

  11. jealouspirate says:

    Is it better than Far Cry 2? I found that one very hard to play, with a terrible story and enemies you shot you on sight from miles away.

    • Gorf says:

      It takes the best from FC1+2 (gets rid of all the annoying shit)and adds lots of other goodness.

    • hemmingjay says:

      It’s better than FC2 AND FC1

      • Fallward says:

        Perhaps a marginal improvement from FC2, but FC1 remains the best (for the time anyway).

  12. Gorf says:

    First time since forever Iam actually letting myself get immersed into a game…..and its not even an RPG!

    Great exploration, great stealth, great fps with a neat peak and shoot cover system, great crafting that hasnt pissed me off once because everything just happens at the right time.Seriously i fucking love it.

    • ulix says:

      I played this the other morning, returning from the club high on weed and drunk on booze. Man, it was the most fun I’ve had with videogames in a long, long time (and I often play games drunk and/or high). I was completely engrossed in it.

  13. DickSocrates says:

    Talking of sprinting, playing Fallout 3 again is a test of patience with how ridiculously slow the main character “runs”. I can run faster in real life. And I can’t run very fast.

    I know I can mod it. In fact, that’s what I’m going to do RIGHT now.

  14. x. says:

    I disliked the rapey bits. No media attention for ’em, either.

    • cjlr says:

      Wait, what?

      • x. says:


        The protagonist is drugged and basically raped by a woman.

        The protagonist’s friend (male) is raped multiple times by a bad guy. After the ordeal, the friend asks the protagonist not to tell anyone about this. The protagonist agrees.

        • Heliocentric says:

          Would it have been to much to include a YES/NO/I HAVE TO THINK ABOUT IT dialogue box? Essentially the game is passively promoting keeping rape quiet if what’s being posted is accurate.

    • Buttless Boy says:

      Ugh, again? Is it just me, or have the last few years of AAA games been utterly obsessed with victimized women? Dead Island, Mass Effect 2, Borderlands 2, even Skyrim had a bit of it. I like offensive exploitation tropes as much as the next B-movie fan, but it’s getting kind of disgusting even for me.

      • Xantonze says:

        Well, not to spoil anything, but in FC3, the perv white boy gets is fair share of abuse too.

        • Buttless Boy says:

          Well, I guess that’s better. Is that better?

          • Xantonze says:

            No, I’m not sure it’s better. :)
            But since the whole game is making fun and mocking the “rich and young white boy” stereotype, it somehow works with the theme: they seem to get punished for their “sins” (the abused boy is a pervert, the big brother who was in the army gets shot in 2 mn and the good-for-nothing brother he was dragging along becomes the hero, the hero – a gamer -, “wins the game” in a very displeasant way, etc).
            Though in the rape case, the way the mollester brags about and makes fun of it is quite unpleasing. Of course you get to kill him, but it’s an easy trick to walk away with that kind of shock value.

            Also, there aren’t any “rapey bits” apart from the white boy situation, afaik. (there are some allusions to local women being abused by the soldiers/pirates, and quite a bit of prostitution going though).

            It’s a really silly plot though, and the whole thing sounds more like a crazy fable (hence the Alice quotes) or a direct-to-video B-movie than any serious attempt to use those themes or even allure players with them. Sure, it’s the same setting as in the Hostel movies, where the so-called criticism of young wasps was just an excuse to show unabashed horror. I don’t find this game as offensive though.
            Maybe Mr. Walker will have some things to say on this theme tomorrow! :)

          • Buttless Boy says:

            I’d like to see an RPS take on the subject, for sure.

  15. Drake Sigar says:

    I went fishing once. Caught a fish on the first cast, 8 pound trout. Then my father got a club out and started whacking seven shades of shit out of it. The whole experience was comical, though I also thought he’d lost his mind.

  16. derbefrier says:

    Glad I pre ordered this last night now I just gotta wait for it make that long journey across the oceans of the internet to the US. I have been wanting to get into a good single player FPS lately and this seems to be the answer.

  17. Lord Custard Smingleigh says:

    I’m not sure how this could compare to Far Cry 2. Mainly because I played the game while sweating and delirious with fever fighting off a nasty infection, which does wonders for the immersion when playing a game set in Africa with a protagonist who is battling malaria. So far nothing can hold a candle to my (possibly partly or wholly hallucinated) Far Cry 2 jaunt.

    • Kohlrabi says:

      Malaria was magnificent, gunplay was great, bush fires were beautiful. But everything else was just an unfinished and unpolished mess.

    • Aluschaaf says:

      I’m going to agree with you on this one – absolutely loved the exotic but slightly bleak setting of FC2 and the horrible things its mechanics made me do and then later rub in my face.
      I still believe it pulled the “I really should stop killing people”-motive off significantly better than Spec Ops.
      Edit: Also, sneaking into an enemy camp at nighttime, just killing the one dude you were supposed to kill with a silenced pistol and vanishing again was awesome.

    • Arglebargle says:

      That’s dedication to method game playing!

      My method of enjoying FC2 involved becoming happily insensate after using an eraser program on its space on my hard drive.

    • I Got Pineapples says:

      FC2 is why I couldn’t take Spec Ops seriously.

      That and the fact it made Hideo Fucking Kojima look like a model of restraint and subtlety.

  18. mehteh says:

    I would have bought this if it wasnt for the Uplay DRM

    • mrmalodor says:

      It has an offline mode, you idiot. You don’t have to connect at all.

  19. Casimir's Blake says:

    Has anyone worked out how to turn off quest waypoint markers? As remarkable as some elements of Far Cry 3 are, I intensely dislike the convoluted “requires-too-many-presses-of-ESC-to-quit” menu system, and – most pressingly – the fact that the game insists on treating me like a retard because I MUST follow waypoints by walking to a specific point, and it refuses to let me turn the sodding things off.

    It was heinous in Aliens vs. Predator 2010, and it’s just as horrible here.

  20. Dangerdad says:

    Uh, sprinting was done right in Bordlands 1 & 2. Tap a key to start running. As long as you’re moving, you keep running. Your character might start breathing heavily, but you keep running.

    • Xyvik says:

      Thank you. I read that gripe in the story and was like “excuse me? ever heard of Borderlands?”

      As for the rest of it, I have never played any Far Cry game. I shall take a closer look at this one come some ridiculous sale.

      • Dangerdad says:

        Far Cry was brilliant until the monsters came out. Far Cry 2 was horrible in nearly all possible ways. Sounds like rev 3 might get it right again.

    • gwathdring says:

      Also in Planetside 2, the only downside to sprinting is that you can’t shoot. It’s not THAT much faster than walking, but it’s still nice.

      • gwathdring says:

        I can’t think of many games where limited sprinting felt like a respectable mechanic. Perhaps in Battlefield 2? It almost always feels like a senseless limitation that does not so much make the game more difficult as more frustrating–and when it DOES make the game more difficult it tends not to be a very interesting limitation. I feel like a core functionality like that shouldn’t be limited unless such limitations are a core mechanical conceit. For example, if I can jump up and down indefinitely and swing my arms around in a violent and likewise indefinite matter … I should probably be able to run/sprint at least a very, very long way and probably indefinitely.

        Sometimes, I’m sure, exceptions might actually improve the game … but if my character fight and jump and walk (or run) and stay awake and alert forever like some sort of immortal being, there better be a damn good reason I can’t run at top speed for as long as I want–especially if running at top speed already limits my maneuverability and ability to use weapons and such. This is also why I favor regenerating health without REALLY good reasons to introducing partially regenerative systems or straight-up health packs.

        I also tend not to like Mana bars in games like Skyrim. On the one hand I don’t see that as an arbitrary and unreasonable limit like I do with most sprinting mechanics. I think it represents an inelegant and not-so-pleasant magical system rather than being a poor mechanization of said system. But now I’m way off-topic.

  21. BULArmy says:

    I have some problems with the game, but I am overlooking them, because what is the rest of the game and mabe they are more nitpicking then real problems.

    1.Ubi spent hundreds of $ and they don’t felt spending a little much to make more skins for both allies and enemy troops. I can’t fully embrace in the cause of the game, if the ppl who I must help are consisting of clones. With the bad guys is the same.

    2.For a game with wide arsenal that have detailed history of how they got on the island, we see virtually non other used except for the AK. And I really miss the system with weapon durability from FC2. They have made it right this time though.

    3.Yes the story could have been much better, the story is just there to hold things toggether. I have pictured so much better story for this game and I don’t do that often.
    4.There is still an annoying case of enemies
    respawning(maybe is just a bug), but at 3-4 occasions now the game respawn the enemies after I have cleared them out with a sniper rifle in red territories. And this don’t happen over some time which would seemed normal, it happens the same second I kill the last guy. Up close there is no problemo.

    5.After the woes with the original Far Cry and FC2 Ubi did almost very good job now. Still some enemies are absolutely oblivious to what and how they must do things. Bad guys tha stay at absolutely the same place for the whole battle while you run circles around them. Sometimes spotting is again iffy.

    6.Maybe the biggest problem, what is with the rediculous blue quests? Whay are they there? They are just pontles and don’t have any sense. I don’t know if it is just lazy work or some sinister conspiracy at Ubi’s hands.

    Those are my real problems with the game. I spent almost 20h from Friday till now and I am at 48% and I am still not bored. Yeah I did almost all of the crafting and I have a lot of the guns and attachments so soon I will not need the cash and maybe I will get a little bored with the game, but still it is great game in a see of pretty mediocre titles that claim they are great. More games like FC3 will definetly will be a nice a thing.

  22. nasenbluten says:

    I agree with some of the points. The game is a ton of fun the first couple of hours, then as you clear out camps and start advancing the main quest (I found it quite terrible), it gets boring.

    What this game needs is a SDK released and get mods rolling, but sadly it’s not going to happen.

  23. SuperNashwanPower says:

    I’ve only just started it, and it looks amazing. However, I am guessing that two of the negatives are going to be:

    1. “You are leaving mission area”: Screw that. I want to go and see if there’s mission-useful loot over here, or maybe MILES over there, or chase that gold animal thing thats too fast for me. Stuff your mission area up your suntanned bottom. Admittedly I’ve only played the ‘slaughter the boars and pick plants’ thing, but I wanted to EXPLORE. wHY U NO LET ME OOOBEEEE SOFT?

    2. Mission hints that take up wayyy too much of the screen.

    Anyway, maximum pretty and the opening scene actually made me want to run the hell away from Vaas (though I have been watching the Far Cry experience vids, which may have started me off on that path anyway)

    • Archonsod says:

      Once you get through the initial handholding sequence you’re free to explore. Missions you pick up only start when you deliberately go to the mission area, so even if you have one active you can still wander around until you want to do it. In fact it even encourages it – most of the plot objectives tell you “go see X, or explore the island”.

      • SuperNashwanPower says:

        I know. I just like the option to start a mission and bugger off mid way through it for whatever reason. Like skyrim – I could go in a cave and start a mission but decide I’m too low level, or just be bored, and turn back for the exit to gather resources, grind or do another mission. I don’t really want a solid line between game world and mission area at any point. Maybe it’s ok in practice, will wait and see.

  24. SirKicksalot says:

    Not just sprinting, but traversal as a whole is brilliant.
    One of the things that annoyed me in FC2 was that vertical movement was quite restricted. The main jungle areas were large corridors, few rocks could be properly climbed and so on. You always had to travel a lot just to get over that hill or that rock formation.
    Far Cry 3 is even more accessible than Skyrim in this regard. You can climb almost anything and if you can’t you don’t have to circle around it for 15 minutes to find a path.
    Also, there’s a fucking wingsuit!

    • Low Life says:

      I agree. While it’s not as great as Dishonored (it’s going to be hard to beat Dishonored), it’s a lot of fun just moving around in FC3. Sometimes it feels like I’m taking fall damage from really small falls, but I guess that’s just other games teaching me that falling 10 meters while running is ok.

  25. bovine3dom says:

    I am really, really disappointed by the CO-OP.
    The corridor-shooter-ness and repetitive objectives are at loggerheads with the free-roam and diversity of the single player.

    Why can’t more games take the Borderlands approach?

  26. Jarl Hamburger says:

    I am glad you pointed out the racism in the game. It’s very similar to the same old, “White people save the non-whites from their savageness and primitiveness” trope which is just, well… racist. It’s the white saviour complex, where it’s white people saving people of colour, because clearly, white people are superior and the PoC need “saving”! It’s pretty tiring to see people of colour have their cultures turned in cardboard cutouts when we know that there’s so much more to what Hollywood gives us.

    • Xantonze says:

      The game attends to that in one of the endings.
      Clearly the “white boy” is on a power trip fuelled by the natives. He’s just a tool, being used because he has a motive for vengeance and can reach the dons. The white caracters are mocked constantly throughout the game. Overall, I found FC3 far better on that level than the usual CoDs or… Resident Evil 5 (clearly the worst of the lot).

    • SirKicksalot says:

      The Rakyat are a proud people that adapted to the modern era while also maintaing their cultural identity. There’s nothing savage about them.
      If you see them as savages, the problem is yours, not the game’s.

      • Jarl Hamburger says:


        • thebigJ_A says:

          Idk whether he’s right or not, as the game isn’t out yet here, or even whether you are, but he pretty directly responded to your point.

          • Jarl Hamburger says:

            In what way? I used the word “savageness” to point a very overused trope that makes white people seem superior to anyone who isn’t white and was criticising its use. And then proceeded the explain how just how racist that trope is. I’m not sure how he/she got the idea that I thought the people in the game were savages?

            If Xantonze can reply to my comment on point then so can everybody else.

    • derbefrier says:

      This is just a thought I had after reading SirKicksalot’s reply but It seems ironic because its so subtle only someone with a racist mind would even think about that. seriously think about it. you labeled these characters as savages or “people of color” though out your whole post. your own terminology suggests your the one with the problem like the other guy suggested. This is something that would never have crossed my mind. Color or ethnicity would never even have been a thought or consideration for me. Why? Well because its a non issue for me, my brain doesn’t identify individuals with labels like these. so maybe instead of this ridiculous accusation of racism on some 3rd party maybe you ought to think about why you perceived this the way you did. maybe this projection of racism on a 3rd party is your ego trying to protect itself or maybe I need to quit thinking about crap like this….

      • SuperNashwanPower says:

        Chill out Freud. You could equally say the issue doesn’t occur to you because you have no empathy or awareness of how people on the receiving end of racism see the world. Perhaps you are experiencing transference from past parental punishments, manifesting as criticism for your own latent repressed racism? See how silly it sounds? Its usually best not to psychoanalyse really.

      • Jarl Hamburger says:

        Yeah, you don’t know what you’re talking about. If you think that “people of colour” is a racist term, then you really need to work on your politics and knowledge when it comes to discussing bigotry.

        Just like above commenter that I replied to, you completely missed the point of what I was saying.

        The fact that you are colour blind tells me you are pretty ignorant to racism ie. see above, you don’t know what you’re talking about.

        • Brun says:

          It would be a less than acceptable term in many situations, at least in the United States.

          • Jarl Hamburger says:

            The term you’re referring to is probably “coloured people”. Still, PoC is an acceptable term when talking about bigotry and all things political discourse.

      • Toberoth says:

        The whole “I don’t see colour, I just see people” argument is bullshit, sorry. As humans we’re conditioned to notice things like gender and race–it’s what makes us able to distinguish between other people, for better or worse. To argue that it’s not an issue for you at all implies that you’ve never actually thought about race at all, and are therefore as ignorant about issues of racism as you apparently are about psychoanalysis. Whenever someone says that an issue shouldn’t be discussed because it’s not an issue, it should immediately be cause for suspicion. Maybe you should think about the privilege that allows you to take that view, rather than calling someone a racist because they want to talk about race.

  27. GameCat says:

    “I went fishing once, and it felt like a warcrime.”
    “Fuck those sharks – they’re holding my many, many dollars together. But that ray? He didn’t have any reason to die. I’m sad about the manta ray.”
    Those are the best lines ever written.

  28. Runs With Foxes says:

    “But I also don’t know how they could have done it differently …”

    Gee I don’t know, maybe by not trying to tell a stupid forced linear character-driven story in an open world game? Maybe? Maybe by embracing the ability for players to forge their own story instead of having one forced down their throats? Maybe by not writing a crappy story that tries to make us feel super emotional about ‘killing people’ in a genre that’s characterised by the indiscriminate killing of thousands of people, a practice that we have always found very fun and easy to do because it’s actually just a videogame and we all understand and are fine with that because we’re not actually idiots?

    • Xantonze says:

      You mean the game should have been Spec Ops?
      The silly plot works fine with the silly setting (thousands of soldiers, not-so-hidden weapon and relic caches, dozens of different wild animals that you hunt to craft rucksacks, free to hi-jack cars/boats/deltaplanes/you name it everywhere, shooting ranges, radar towers, crazy hunting and secondary quests on a 50 km² area) : this is a wonderland, not Pathologic’s town, and the Alice quotes work fine in that aspect. A serious plot there would have been counter-productive imho. I liked the stupid plot, and also the conversations during the “blue” quests (those quests where crap, but the talky bits were good fun). :)

      • Runs With Foxes says:

        “You mean the game should have been Spec Ops?”

        How on earth do you get that from my post? Spec Ops is the most egregious example of the kind of crap I’m lambasting here.

    • Fox89 says:

      I love the character driven story in this game. Well, I really enjoy the characters at any rate, I dunno how well the story itself will conclude. You still get to fashion your own stories around that though, so what’s the problem?

  29. Baal_Sagoth says:

    Such an enticing take on FC3. I’m still torn on this one and reading all these fantastic points about its design have me quite excited. I’d be more than OK with buying this and, while stretching the budget badly, I think I could get away with also purchasing this game even after a very succesful and expensive year in gaming for me.
    Now, the story at least doesn’t seem to bluntly go for “let the spiritual brown people cure you of your silly cracker ways”. Instead the narrative appears to acknowledge some of the surreal elements of it being the wrapper of a videogame which is very good. If it were to end up being entirely serious about the thrill-seeking bro being the chosen one I couldn’t easily forgive that. That leaves the silly DRM schemes as probably my biggest worry. Either way, I can’t wait to see what irked you most. We’ll see how all of it checks out according to my personal preferences then!

  30. Fox89 says:

    I’m part way through Far Cry 3 and absolutely loving it. I think I’m enjoying it as much as Dishonored, maybe even slightly more. I look forward to seeing the ‘bad’ list tomorrow, cause I can think of more than a few just off the top of my head. But for me this is very much a ‘greater than the sum of its parts’ kind of game.

    Hell, I could rattle off a list as long as my arm about all the things wrong with the original Deus Ex. They were numerous, obtrusive and sometimes ridiculous. Doesn’t mean the game isn’t brilliant though, and the same applies here. This is a game with character.

    By the way, I am offering a million internets for the first video to show a C4 on hang glider shark kill.

  31. wodin says:

    I’m enjoying it..far more so than Dishonoured or any other game released this year..a surprise hit for me..great fun..lots to do..

    These people that can burn through the game so quickly surprise me..surely they didn’t do everything?

    The driving is fun aswell..

  32. Xantonze says:

    The bad things about the game so John doesn’t need to write anymore:

    (from PC GAMER review) :

    I’ve been putting it off, but I should probably talk about the story missions. The pirates have captured – no kidding – you, your brother, your brother’s girlfriend, your girlfriend, your friend, your other brother, and your other friend. By the end of it I was surprised we didn’t also find my mother, niece and high-school English teacher somewhere in the compound.

    It’s not all bad. About half of the Jesus Christ thirty-eight missions give you enough freedom to have fun with the predatory combat systems that make the outpost fights so great. The other half… erk. They’re like a guided tour of all the clumsiest ways to mash story and videogames together until both of them break.

    You left the mission area! Restart! You lost the target! Restart! You failed the quicktime event! Restart! A plot character got themselves killed! Restart! We spawned some enemies in a spot you knew was empty! Restart!

    • wodin says:

      SO far haven’t witnessed any of them..except leaving the area and that was at the very star of the game..so no idea where and when those issues arrive…doesn’t even sound like the same game….

      “You left the mission area! Restart! You lost the target! Restart! You failed the quicktime event! Restart! A plot character got themselves killed! Restart! We spawned some enemies in a spot you knew was empty! Restart!”

      • Isair says:

        I got the plot character got killed a couple of times, but the first time was due to pretty much the entire village we were in was lit on fire and the second time was because I happened to blow up the helicopter he was in. For the most part you will go down far qucker then your allies.

        I also belive there’s an option to turn off difficult QTEs so that’s a nice touch.

    • Fox89 says:

      I wasn’t even too bothered about that. For a couple of reasons.

      1) Mission areas were always very clearly marked on the mini-map.
      2) It only does that for the story stuff, so you can pick and choose when to put up with it. “Oh hey, I’ve been messing around on this Island for a couple of hours, I feel like a bit of linear story progression now”.

      While I won’t try to deny these are flaws, certainly in my experience they were relatively unobtrusive and rare.

      • Xantonze says:

        I agree, it’s mostly inoffensive stuff. Having to replay some nearly-cutscenes because of failed QTEs got annoying a couple of times though.

  33. frightlever says:

    One of the recent Mythbusters had an episode about jumping into water from height. They were disproving an episode of Burn Notice where a mattress was used to cushion a 35 foot jump into a swimming pool that was only 4.5 ft deep. Pretty entertaining.

    SPOILER: adding the mattress will eff you up.

  34. JackShandy says:

    “And yes, as Jim pointed out, there is a somewhat dramatic shift from the first time you stab a guy to kill him, to mowing down crowds with machine guns. It is jarring. But I also don’t know how they could have done it differently”

    Just use the Deus Ex system to make you crap at guns. J.C. Denton starts out as shit as Jason Brody is meant to be. Have combat start as a horrifying, chaotic, almost survival horror thing like it is in Stalker, then slowly increase your aim with skills and the like until you are as godlike as Jason is now. That would have been a really satisfying progression.

  35. Xantonze says:

    Funny thing I just noticed: for the assassination missions, where you’re supposed to use the knife to kill the target: you can also use mines. Fun ensues.

  36. Pundabaya says:

    Here’s one for you, anyone else notice how video-gamey the arsenal is? The ex-soviet stuff? Fine. Thats the sort of stuff Somali Pirates, various drug lords etc are running round with. 1911, also fine, tons of those knocking around, worldwide. Winchester 1887? Vector SMG? Minimi/M249? Desert Eagle? Franchi SPAS-12? FAMAS? M416? MP5N?

    Those are Call of Duty guns. The sort of weapons a video gamer is likely to know, but not be aware of how unlikely they are to appear on an isolated south seas island.

    • I Got Pineapples says:

      To be fair, they actually explain why every single gun is on the island.

    • colw00t says:

      Any modern game involving shooting mans is going to have a lot of overlap in the weapons available, partially because most of them are very readily available, and a lot of the rest look neat.

      One day a video game will model an AK correctly and I will drop dead of shock. The one in FC3 is called an AK-47, but it’s actually an AK-103 with the -74s muzzle brake and the -47s magazines.

      Incidentally, at the beginning of the game your island guide bro gives you $60 to go off and buy a $1200 custom 1911. An old army surplus one I could see, but Kimber Warriors are rare and pricey.

      • Pundabaya says:

        The point I was trying to make was, if the game is really Jason’s brain breaking into one long insane power/revenge fantasy, those are the sorts of guns a gamer would fantasise about. The intel guy even lampshades it in the 1887 entry.

  37. Lolmasaurus says:

    My biggest gripe with the game so far is it’s stubborn insistence on making me hold ‘E’ to do stuff, do we not agree that pressing is a fairly well accepted method ubisoft? It’s unnecessary and constant. Otherwise, I think the game is brilliant. Especially the toys, I particularly enjoy attempting to lure a whole outpost into one building, which is conveniently furnished with several mines and a bit of c4.
    Oh, and the fire is great.

  38. mrmalodor says:

    FC3 definitely surprised me. I was 90% certain that it was going to be a console turd, but it’s actually very good.

  39. Sunjammer says:

    I’ve been struggling with the hunting and economy. Halfway in money has no value yet the world is full of loot. What’s my incentive, plain bloody minded completionism? And the hunting is the dark joke of 2012 for me. Kill all animals! I shot a Galapagos turtle in the face as it was trying to hide in its shell and I suspect I’ll still feel bad about that come next November.

    The white man’s fantasy of a story never stopped feeling like exactly that. And the game BSODs on me regularly.

    But man. Still a ton of fun to play.

  40. Screamer says:

    I think also a mention that while the game does look good, Crysis 1 , a 5 + year old game does look better and runs better as well.

  41. Maldomel says:

    Is that the GTA UI I spot in those screens? Have I missed something?

    • mrmalodor says:

      What do you mean? Most sandbox games have a similar UI these days, it’s not unique to GTA. Far Cry adopted a sandbox style since the second iteration.

  42. SuicideKing says:

    Even BF3 and (ironically) America’s Army 2 let you sprint indefinitely.

  43. gibb3h says:

    Any word on if this is coming to Steam/something that doesn’t require Origin yet?

    • mrmalodor says:

      Get with the program. It’s already on Steam.

      • DPB says:

        Not in the UK, nor is Assassin’s Creed III.

        • mrmalodor says:

          Really? That sucks. That explains why the number of people playing it is so low, plus the delayed US release.

  44. killuminati says:

    I think I’m gonna buy it on Christmas for my 360. Yes I know would be better on the PC, my PC that is more powerful and controls better than my 360 but.. I will be moving to a new home without Internet connection ( hopefully for the shortest time possible… damn carrier and their lazyness) and this makes me a vvery sad panda..
    But I read only good thing son this and could be buying a Farc Sry game for the second time since the first one was released!

  45. harvb says:

    Okay, serious questions…

    Are there any spiders in it?

    Does anyone who sometimes gets motion sickness suffer in FC3?


    • Unrein says:

      No spiders at about 3/4 of the game in. Dunno about the motion sickness, but the generous FOV slider might help with that.

    • Isair says:

      This may actually be the fps I’ve gotten the least motion sick from. Bear in mind though, that I mostly get affected when playing for a long time and the game has a lot of instances where you get spun around or otherwise end up disoriented.

      Regarding spiders, there are no live ones. One of the optional collectables is a spider statuette and you will get a tattoo with some spider motifs.

  46. MajorManiac says:

    I haven’t play it yet. But I think my favorite thing about this game will be pretending to be somewhere hot and sunny, whilst ignoring whats outside.

  47. dawdzi says:

    Again, get over the racism. nobodys being racist you’re just looking for it and that’s why you notice it. You can find racism in literally ANYTHING if you’re looking for it.