Far Cry Classic Is An Updated Version Of The Original

As part of my continuing display of ignorance, I hadn’t realised that the upcoming Far Cry The Wild Expedition – a bundle of all the previous Far Cries in one imaginary box – was going to contain something called Far Cry: Classic – a slightly remade version of the original game. Something that’s already available for consoles, apparently, but sigh Ubisoft etc. It seems the PC will only get it on the 21st, as a part of the rest of the pack.

Not being able to play it yet, I’m not entirely sure what’s new in the remake. But they promise an HD version, with “realistic foliage”, day-night cycles, and new vehicles. Which all sounds tremendous. Also, a little frightening for my brain, because I remember when Far Cry first appeared, and boldly declared then and there that graphics were photorealistic now. I wonder if I did the same the first time I saw a Speccy adventure scrawl a drawing of a Hobbit tunnel, staring in confusion at my television, convinced it had somehow become a window to another world.

The rest of The Wild Expedition will be the vanilla Far Cry 2, 2012’s best shooter Far Cry 3, and the massively overrated Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon. All that for £25, which doesn’t seem too bad at all. It’s just a peculiar and inexplicable shame that Ubi has no plans to release the £8 Far Cry: Classic as a standalone on PC.


  1. Cortes says:

    Great trailer! That can be best part of Far Cry.

  2. Cytrom says:

    Is the pack infected with uPlay even on steam?

    • Monkeh says:

      AFAIK all games by Ubisoft have to launch through Uplay. And yes, this also applies to Ubisoft’s games on Steam.

  3. frightlever says:

    Can they make the last little bit of Far Cry HD just a smidge easier. Never did finish it. My last recollection of that game was something like leaving a lift and having all hell descend on me.

    • The Random One says:

      That’s the same final memory I have of the first Half Life. Er, in that case it was a tad earlier in the game…

    • CookPassBabtridge says:

      There’s always god mode

    • NathaI3 says:

      Same here. Main memory of this game is playing certain sections over and over and over again due to the difficulty.

      • CookPassBabtridge says:

        “I learn real quick when people are shootin’ at me”

      • Carra says:

        The seconds those alien beastie things started attacking the fun was over for me, got too hard indeed.

      • Smoky_the_Bear says:

        Aliens? Pretty sure the weird stuff in Far Cry were some form of biologically altered mutants.

        But yeah that last area full of those big rocket launcher things and the stealthed stuff above was nasty, took many many attempts. Also remember being scared witless by the jumpy melee mutants that one shotted you. Great game though, HD remake of this might be fun for the right price.

      • Premium User Badge

        Harlander says:

        My main memory of this is the absolutely appalling voice acting and writing for the protagonist – and his Hawaiian shirt which makes him look like Sheldon from Just Cause. (In fact it pleases me to assume that they are, in fact, the same character)

      • frightlever says:

        First time was the run from the helicopter. Replayed that SOOO many times.

        I liked the monsters at first but once they became near invulnerable super-soldiers it just seemed like bad design.

    • Wedge says:

      Yeah I remember running a particular part at the end quite a few times, where you had to fight a ton of guys at once in a small lobby . I think that may be what you’re remembering. But it was pretty fucking epic when you were driving around across an active volcano and mutants and soldiers and stuff were running wild all over the place. Most of the time though it was one of the greatest open ended stealth games ever made, since being seen would usually get you ended in a hurry.

    • Werthead says:

      The lobby shoot-out (which was a bit Matrix-esque) was tough, but fun. The final battle in the volcano’s caldera was completely insane. I remember cowering in the doorway and lobbing out grenades to try to take out the big bazooka guys as they came up before switching to rocket launchers. It was tough because the enemy had the lift covered by rocket guys, snipers and tons of normal machine-gunners as well as those cloaked guys. It was tough, but satisfying when you nailed it.

    • djbriandamage says:

      I hated this game because every enemy had binocular periscope goggles that could see me from miles away. The protagonist wears a very loud shirt, but come on.

  4. CookPassBabtridge says:

    Far Cry 1 was utterly awesome at the time. I remember being amazed by the first person jeeps and the fact that the windscreen would get bullet holes in it. I loved the weapon modes on the guns that let me be super accurate with headshots. I loved the what-to-me-were wide open maps, having only really played stuff like Half Life and COD at that point, that would let me handle levels in any way I wanted. I loved the scopes. I loved the ability to lean. I loved not knowing where the enemies were and the sensation of being hunted. I loved that it was really quite difficult. I loved the equipment and the sandboxy nature of it all. I loved that M249 and mowing down heavily armoured bad dudes coming out of a lift and praying I wouldn;t run out of ammo because HOLY CRAP long reload time.

    The Trigens. I did not love the Trigens. They can go and die in a Shell petrol station toilet.

    • Bury The Hammer says:

      Man, yeah, Far Cry really was great, especially for the time. And it looked AMAZING. The tropical climate helped a lot, though.

      Just a shame there were too many shite ‘corridor’ levels, essentially reducing it to a bland FPS, instead of the ace free roaming bits.

      • CookPassBabtridge says:

        Its odd to see you say that. I remember mostly the outdoor parts and always felt the indoor sections were well placed to add variety. The pacing worked – it was like a real world, with locations and the spaces between them. That boat section with the multiple islands is one of THE stand out shooter experiences, and was glad it was largely aped in Far Cry 3.

        • PopeRatzo says:

          The prettiest thing about Far Cry was the light. The way it seemed like real space instead of a painted 3D set like most games of the time (and to be honest, most games today).

          Far Cry and Burnout Paradise were the first games that I remember loving because of the way outdoor light was portrayed. Far Cry 3 got there too, and some of the later Criterion NFS games were able to make the light feel so…spacious. The latest NFS Rivals, has a grainy, filmic quality that was not as nice as say, NFS: Most Wanted or Hot Pursuit, but Rivals is a better game than those other two.

          I own all the Far Cry’s, but I’d love to buy Far Cry Classic if I could. I want to be back on that Apocalypse Now river, taking out bad guys on rope bridges over head.

    • XhomeB says:

      I remember following the development of both HL2 and Doom3, wondering which one would impress me more. And then, FC came out. Out of the blue. I played the demo and was stunned. It wasn’t just unbelievably pretty, its gameplay was impressive, as well. When I finally got to play HL2 and D3, many of their aspects felt lacking when compared to FC.

      • Werthead says:

        Same here. I caught the demo (on PC GAMER, I think) and was stunned that I’d heard nothing about it up to that point. I was working in a computer store and remember putting the demo on every machine we had (capable of handling it, anyway) and it just blew customers away when they came in.

        The Trigens were annoying, but they did come and go throughout the game, and you ended up fighting the mercs quite a lot throughout the game (many of the later levels were merc-only), which made it bearable. CRYSIS was more annoying because the aliens appeared and not long afterwards the human enemies all vanished and you spent the rest of the game fighting these flying squid things with really basic AI.

      • Smoky_the_Bear says:

        Hehe exactly the same, randomly downloaded the demo, hadn’t heard a thing about it. Ended up buying the game AND a DVD drive to play it with because nowhere had the 5 CD version.

    • deadly.by.design says:

      It’s nice to see these comments confirm my negative opinion about the Trigens. Similarly, I’m with the guy who loved Crysis up until the alien part.

      Give me FPS where I can stalk human opponents through exotic environments and I am sold. I guess it’s no surprise that I’ve enjoyed every FarCry and the first half of Crysis.

    • Smoky_the_Bear says:

      The Trigens were great imo. They scared the shit out of me, I remember thinking they should take the workings of the Trigens and turn them into an Alien game because they pretty much created the atmosphere you would want from an Alien game better than any Alien game has done. The feeling of stuff silently lying in wait, hiding in shadows, get too close and you are dead. It was a great change of pace from the man vs man combat.

      If anything, the game, like all the Crisis games, it suffered from getting a bit silly towards the end with “Genetically Engineered Rocket Launcher Arm” mutants and the like, but the Trigens were more believable as a mutant animal.

  5. Greggh says:

    “the massively overrated Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon”

    You made me die a little.

    • caff says:

      I agreed wholeheartedly with it being massively overrated. The experience was pretty awful in my view.

    • killias2 says:

      I honestly don’t get the hatred. I think it comes down to a “each their own” kinda thing, as I loved my time with Blood Dragon immensely. My only complaint with it was that there wasn’t enough main story content, the best part of the game. However, it had about what you’d expect for a game in its price range, so I can’t really complain there. The bases and collectables were completely unnecessary to do, but it was still fun enough for me to do it all. I also loved the ending. A lot.

    • secuda says:

      YEa dont get it either? though it had fun gameplay, though the ending was kind of meh.

    • PopeRatzo says:

      If you go back to the release of Far Cry 3 Blood Dragon, you will notice that much of the “overrating” came from this very site.

    • HisDivineOrder says:

      I think Blood Dragon just overstayed its welcome with the lack of story it had.

  6. Juan Carlo says:

    My anal retentive insistence on playing every game on the hardest difficulty prevented me from ever finishing this game. It really sucked at the time just because the AI was pretty stupid, but there were tons of enemies and they had really good aim. So I remember lots of shooting someone, then hiding behind a corner and picking enemies off one by one as they stupidly came to kill me. Which was kind of boring.

    And then the Trigens came and I gave up.

    I thought Crysis, on the other hand, was just right on the hardest difficulty. Hard enough to give you a challenge, but not impossible like Far Cry 1 was.

    • SkittleDiddler says:

      Sigh. Those stupid Trigens. What a way to completely kill the mood in an otherwise moderately passable shooter.

      • CookPassBabtridge says:

        Automatic shotgun. Job done.

        • Aiken Drum says:

          This is true. One or two shots from the awesome Jackhammer would put down any trigen. Three in the chest for the brutes (hint – aim for the green button on those, not the head)

    • Werthead says:

      Trigens > Flying Squid Aliens.

      If only because the Trigens would come and go through the game, and are absent from quite a few later levels altogether. Whilst the Flying Squid Aliens in CRYSIS showed up and that was pretty much it for fighting the human enemies.

      • HisDivineOrder says:

        The funny thing is you have Crytek who made Far Cry and the complaints about the game mostly fall exactly in line with what’s being said here. The human parts rock, the trigens suck.

        So what do they do?

        They double down, buddy. They make the Zerg or whatever the hell those aliens were called even more a part of their next game.

        Cuz they’re going to convince you it’s awesome by upping your exposure to annoying inhuman enemies.

    • Smoky_the_Bear says:

      To be fair though that is your fault, not the games fault. If you aren’t willing to drop the difficulty when it gets too hard that’s your fault. A games hardest difficulty should not necessarily be pitched at your skill level. I’m sure some people completed it.

  7. thecommoncold says:

    Updated, maybe, but I won’t consider it improved unless they removed the mutants. The original FC would have been brilliant if those fun-sucking trigen never showed up.

    • XhomeB says:

      I don’t know, I enjoyed certain levels with them, they did have that “The Island of Doctor Moreau” appeal for me. They did turn a few sections into a chore, but there were times when I found them genuinely scary in a good way.

      • LennyLeonardo says:

        Oh thank God, I’m not the only one. I thought Trigens were scary as hell. But then I was like 12 or something.

        I just checked and I was actually 21. Don’t look at me!

  8. Jim Reaper says:

    The original Far Cry was brilliant..well, the first bit anyway. Then I played Crysis. I’ve never been able to go back to Far Cry since because of the lack of Nanosuit shenanigans. What I really want is Crysis 1 without the aliens.

    • XhomeB says:

      I’d say FC had a bit better level design… well, more consisent at least. Some of the later Crysis levels simply weren’t fun, and it wasn’t solely because of the aliens.

      • CookPassBabtridge says:

        With crysis 1, basically you can stop playing the moment it all goes cold. Thats when the human opponents all leave.

        Warhead was a bit better for that though IIRC

    • Cortes says:

      Yeah Crysis is great game:) I like if FC3 will be something like that.

  9. XhomeB says:

    IRON SIGHTS! Ugh, take it away, take it away!
    Granted, FC did allow you to zoom in a bit, but that was it. Iron sights serve precisely zero purpose in modern shooters apart from making your totally inaccurate weapon super accurate, obscuring your vision, reducing your speed to almost zero and slowing down the gameplay as a result. Stupid mechanic, never liked it, it only makes sense in sims like ArmA, but not in a fast paced FPS. I like shooting while being on the move Commando-style, thank you very much.

    • Snids says:

      I can appreciate all flavours of manshoot.
      I personally enjoy iron sights as they make shooting a gun a little bit more like shooting a gun. This allows for a different type of game.
      Railgun ballet is welcome its place as well of course.

    • CookPassBabtridge says:

      @XHomeB: You forgot “requiring you to hold the right mouse button thus making fast aim tracking harder than necessary”.

      Why can’t more games include a RMB=toggle iron sights option?

  10. Sacarathe says:

    A Legacy with nothing to do with or remotely similar to the original. FC1 is the best FC. Though I did enjoy Blood dragon myself.

  11. DatonKallandor says:

    “2012′s best shooter Far Cry 3, and the massively overrated Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon”
    You got that backwards. It’s “2012′s best shooter Far Cry 3:Blood Dragon, and the massively overrated Far Cry 3.”

    • Snids says:

      This is a boring comment. If he meant that, he would’ve written it.

      I mean like, “No, actually you mean the other thing is true” is that funny? Interesting?

      Seems like a waste of time to me. To bother to write that. I was deadpanning I think. Trying to point out it was just a crap thing to say.

      • killias2 says:

        I’m guessing he wasn’t really arguing that Walker meant to write this other thing. Then again, I don’t really think that you really think that he was really arguing that Walker meant to write this other thing.

        Wait.. what?

        In any case, GO BLOOD DRAGON

        • Snids says:

          I enjoy synthesisers. So, Blowed Drags-on (GEDDIT?!) had that going for it I guess. Conceptually I liked it. I just couldn’t be arsed. Also, nice to hear from Michael Biehn.

      • CookPassBabtridge says:

        Edit: Yeah what killias said. I don’t think he was correcting the sentence structure.

      • Smoky_the_Bear says:

        He’s basically saying “I disagree with you”, in the manner of a complete twat. Stating the writer was clearly wrong for having a different opinion. Mostly it seems he is one of those people who takes his opinion as absolute fact and feels the need to tell people they are “wrong” when they disagree with his “facts”.

        • Premium User Badge

          Harlander says:

          The technical term for this is “a person on the Internet”

  12. Barberetti says:

    “The rest of The Wild Expedition will be the vanilla Far Cry 2”


  13. jonahcutter says:

    Love the original FC. The open maps and the feel of an actual living world. Npcs that actually seemed to exist outside of being placed to be shot by me. And that seemed to actually hunt me and respond to actions. I don’t know if it holds up, but it was amazing at the time.

    And I think I’m one of the few that didn’t hate the trigens. They could be hard to deal with, but I thought they were a fun, pulpy sci-fi enemy. Cyborg apes if I remember right.

    I’d consider paying for a spiffier, HD Far Cry by itself. Or even bundled with FC2 (which I’ve yet to play). But FC3 is so painfully stupid I can’t take part in having more copies of it existing in the world. I’ve been a bad person at times in my life, but I’m not that much of a monster.

  14. Jakkar says:

    As several have commented… What? Far Cry 3, sickeningly repetitive animal-slaughter simulator with a plot admittedly designed to make you hate your own player-character, riddled with bugs of the not-an-insect kind?

    Blood Dragon made that awful gameplay system WORK, by making it aware of its own ridiculousness, a far more palatable length, packed with humour, and suspended disbelief by making you a fucking 80s super-cyborg.


    I despair.

    • CookPassBabtridge says:

      I think I can explain it. Far Cry 3 is actually 2 completely different games, depending on how you play it. I hated it, barring a couple of good levels. However, I made it my priority to take out all the (very enjoyable) bases and do all the crafting and radio tower unlocking first. This is AN INCREDIBLY BAD IDEA because it does something catastrophic: Although you get the goodies, it destroys any emergent gameplay (enemy patrols reduce to a near non-existent trickle once sectors are friendly) and removes any respectable side quests. You have to wait until the second island to get that threat back, but its over very quickly. Friendly patrols even mean that wild animals are often shot FOR YOU. Boo.

      However, leave a number of the bases intact, dont unlock towers, and save up the crafting, and suddenly you have a game that produces constant excellent emergent scenarios – the feature that the game’s exponents most seemed to trumpet. I personally could not see the game that RPS seemed to love so much, but I think that’s partly because I murdered the first island too early on. That meant the QTE’s, turret sections, awful characters, “you are leaving mission area”, rapey part and forced torture were left to carry the game for me. Aside from 3 or 4 open missions, I found myself screaming at the screen most of the time.

      • HisDivineOrder says:

        I always make it a point to conquer the city/hubs/towers/whatever if there are things like that in a game. It makes travel easier and gets me as many upgrades as possible. I do this just as soon as I have viable strategy for taking down the towers/bases/forts/whatever.

        Eventually, I made myself a mini-game of having to beat the bases without being detected, which I mostly did with use of long-range application of sniper rifles and grenades if they got a little too close. Usually, they’d never get in range to “detect” me.

        I cleared the whole top island that way. Then did the missions to get to the second island.

        My thoughts mirror yours. I think the best way to fix this scenario is to learn from the original “open world” games like GTA and do a “content block” on sections of “the city” (or in this case island) until you complete certain missions.

        That way, you don’t own the island before you start the missions. Perhaps there should have been MORE islands with the starting one being smaller, then scaling up as you get more and more missions under your belt.

        At least they had that priceless line of dialogue:

        “You strapped C4 to a monkey!”

        “Yeah, but I hugged them lil’ dudes after.”

        “Yeah, whatever.”

        “Here’s your C4. Now c’mere, gimme a hug…”

        “Wtf? Are you serious?”


        Heh. Why wouldn’t the game let me blow him up after? Why?

      • Smoky_the_Bear says:

        Yeah while I think you are both right I think it is the fault of the devs to a certain extent. It’s touted as a completely open world experience, you should be able to do whatever you want. If by choosing a certain gameplay path you can trivialise the rest of the game, including the main story, then the game has a problem.

        People always cry for games to be more and more open without realising some form of linear progression, in this case as HisDivineOrder pointed out, locking areas away until certain conditions are met, is necessary to keep the game paced correctly and stop things like the case in FC3 where you almost completely remove all enemies from the area then proceed to do a bunch of MMO style “take quest, go there, kill a few things, complete quest, turn it in, take next quest…..” style nonsense for the next portion of the game.

    • Greggh says:

      “Blood Dragon made that awful gameplay system WORK, by making it aware of its own ridiculousness”


      Although I like playing FC3, in Blood Dragon it actually “makes sense”*, and all the xray, killer-predator stuff is not just a whatchmacalit-plot-thingie, poorly explained by the tattoo generated magic, but it’s OVER-THE-TOP 80’s FICTION! I can believe in over-the-top 80s fiction, allright! Especially when painted in neon!

      +1 team Blood Dragon!!!

    • KenTWOu says:

      Blood Dragon made that awful gameplay system WORK

      Blood Dragon threw away lots of very important gameplay stuff, it has less gameplay systems and components, that’s why vanilla Far Cry 3 has much better emergent gameplay and gives you more variety.

  15. Jupiah says:

    And of course North America isn’t getting this cool Wild Expedition collection on 360, PS3 and PC like Europe is getting, we’re just getting a PS3 only “Farcry Compilation”… that doesn’t include this new HD remake of the first Farcry. What the hell?

    • JanusForbeare says:

      Oh boy.

      While, as a North American, I can certainly understand your frustration, you’re playing with fire here. Europe has often gotten the short end of the stick when it comes to game releases, so I think you may be opening yourself up to a harsh euro-bitchslap with this post.

      I’d recommend you do what many of our friends back in the old country have been doing, and order from a European retailer or get a European friend to send it to you.

      • CookPassBabtridge says:

        Yeah. Don’t make us Euro-ers slap you with a metric measurement of bockwurst :)

    • 65 says:

      Get a European friend on Steam to gift it to you.
      You can repay him by constantly gifting him games that are much cheaper in the US.

      • Uboa Noticed You says:

        Being an American, I feel this. It still pains me to see games being released at significantly higher prices because the devs/marketing team/whatever can’t be arsed to lower the price because they want to keep the neat XX.99 formula. I can only imagine what it feels like for the people that actually have to PAY those prices.

  16. Keyrock says:

    and the massively overrated Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon

    You, sir, are a monster.

    The game that’s truly massively overrated is the base Far Cry 3.

  17. SominiTheCommenter says:

    The Blood Dragon vs 3 fight is irrelevant, Far Cry 2 is the best of the bunch BY FAR.

    • SkittleDiddler says:


    • CookPassBabtridge says:

      Best of the bunch BY FAR …. cry?
      And mehhh I dunno with 2. I loved it, played it two or three times and have some great memories from it, but it still came off somehow hollow next to Far Cry1. Maybe its because I played 1 first, or maybe its because I loved 1’s tech porn and more clinical shooting, but yeah. 2 seemed to lack … something. It seemed oddly empty, sometimes in a cool trippy way, but too often just in a “we meant to add more stuff here but forgot” way.

      EDIT: I REALLY disliked the weapon slot management system in FC2 as well, which whilst more realistic from an ‘amount carried’ view, was prohibitive in which weapons it determined could live in which slot. I could never quite get the loadout I wanted, despite the weapons I wanted being much the same size.

    • darkChozo says:

      I’m not sure if I have a favorite between 2 and 3. Far Cry 2 is the ultimate “I have a sniper rifle, IED, and a rocket launcher, how do I take out this outpost in the silliest way possible?” simulator, while 3 is the most interesting stealth-game-that-sometimes-devolves-into-Call-of-Duty game I’ve ever played.

    • Arglebargle says:

      Far Cry 2 could have been a really cool game. But they blew that one. They even knew about a number of the problems during the beta, but it was just too much trouble to fix it. Testament to bad management.

    • Jason Moyer says:

      Far Cry 2 is the best, Far Cry 1 is the worst (and one of the worst games I’ve ever played that was fully functional from a technical standpoint).

    • Keyrock says:

      It’s a testament to how great some aspects of Far Cry 2 are that it’s still a terrific game despite some of the maddening problems it suffers from.

    • Werthead says:

      Christ, no.

      FAR CRY 2 was conceptually brilliant. A game set in Africa (an under-utilised location if there’s ever been one), was completely open-world (well, sort of, you had to unlock the second map) and employed things like rusting weapons and multiple missions for different protagonists.

      In execution, it sucked. The instantly-respawning checkpoints suck all the joy out of playing the game and destroy all attempts at immersion. Either you attack each checkpoint every time you go past, which may mean assaulting the exact same location two or three times during the mission, or you realise the checkpoints are actually quite pointless and drive through them and ignore the guys firing at you (which is more viable for some checkpoints than others).

      Whilst the most noticeable problem, it’s also not the worst. The worst is that there are no characters, at all. There’s no-one with a bit of personality in the entire game, the two factions are completely interchangeable (which may be the cynical point being made, but usually there’s something to differentiate the two sides in a war), there’s no civilians and you certainly don’t have a personality or a character arc or anything at all like. Carver and Random Special Forces Woman and Mad Dr. Moreau Stand-In Guy and That Dude Who’s Doing a Laurence Fishburne Impersonation For No Discernible Reason At All in FAR CRY 1 are all cliches, but at least vaguely memorable. And FC3 of course has Lunatic Sex Woman Who Sexes and Tries To Kill You and Vaas, who was brilliantly acted and so closely based on the voice actor that when the actor showed up in the TV show ORPHAN BLACK you immediately knew who he was.

      Then there’s the plot. There isn’t one. You go into a civil war, get shot up a bit, side with both sides, get betrayed by both sides and erm, that’s about it.

      In terms of game systems, FC2 really didn’t bring anything new to the table apart from the ‘buddy system’, which was a nice idea but didn’t work because I didn’t care about any of the buddies (due to the aforementioned non-existent characterisation) and most of the missions were actually easier on my own, since I didn’t have to keep running back to pump by buddy full of morphine when he was gunned down for the 14th time by charging towards the enemy screaming instead of firing from cover.

      Graphically, it was okay. Some nice atmospheric moments when you got out onto the 200-foot-wide savannaha and half-kilometre-wide desert. Unfortunately, the game really didn’t even start to have the technical ability to try to sell the variety of landscapes it was trying to do, and 90% of the game took place in the jungle-ly and rocky bits of the middle of the map anyway.

      So, okay graphics, boringly repetitive missions (“You must go to LOCATION X and kill PERSON X and retrieve BRIEFCASE X!”), no plot to speak of and no characters to speak of. The combat itself could be quite good and it has that FAR CRY thing of scout/plan/execute down pat, but beyond that it was a game that delighed in frustrating players more than giving them a reason to come back. Also, that thing where you’re working for each side in secret so all of their men attack you even when you’re helping them? Total bollocks.

      It’s a setting they need to do more of, and a FAR CRY 4 set in Africa with more of the game systems and attitude of FC3 could be a really good thing. But FC2 itself must be judged as a brilliant idea that was executed poorly. And it is a FANTASTIC idea. But that doesn’t help if the gameplay is bobbins.

  18. 65 says:

    I’d love to play FC1 again but I also already own all the other FCs on Steam. So £25 for a slightly updated of the first one? Why Ubi, why?

  19. weary ghoul says:

    Ah, Far Cry. One of my favorite games of all time. The graphics, the music, the non-linear gameplay, the clever AI. I loved it all, even the Trigens, which I thought threw an interesting horror-tinged wrench in the works.

    The story was nonsense and Jack Carver’s voice acting was terrible, but even all that was kind of enjoyable in a campy over-the-top way. The only real criticism I have of the game was the very last part of the final Volcano level, which was so mind-meltingly impossible that I had to throw in the towel and use god mode to reach the ending.

    I think it’s great that our console brethren will finally be able to experience this classic game. It’s stupid that it’s not available for individual purchase on PC, but we still have the original version so big deal.

  20. TechnicalBen says:

    What HD remake. This is exactly as I remember it in NostalgiaVison…

    I actually did fire it up again a while back and wow, it had poor graphics. Better than the original HL, but not as good as Crysis. But still, the scope of the game was very large for the hardware it ran on at the time.

  21. Werthead says:

    FAR CRY was amazing. I may actually prefer it to 2 and 3. The structure of the game – using a sequence of insanely huge maps rather than one mega-massive map – worked really well and the focus on combat over crappy and inexplicable animal-skinning escapades was definitely better. The story and voice acting was bobbins, of course, but the freedom and fun was great.

    The Trigens were annoying, but they weren’t that dominant in the game. They appeared for a few levels in a row, then vanished and you were back fighting the more preferable merc enemies, than the Trigens show up in the last couple of levels. And more to the point, the really annoying Trigens (the jumping insta-kill ones) eventually vanished and were replaced by more humanoid enemies anyway. They’re irritating, sure, but they don’t completely replace the human enemies, unlike the aliens and the Koreans in CRYSIS.

  22. Darth Gangrel says:

    I never played the Far Cry games, but I’ll probably pick this bundle up if/when it gets on sale at 75 % or below 10 euros. Hehe, I can wait for that.

    Also, I think Blood Dragon seems to be as good as the Shadow Warrior remake, but as long as I like it, everyone else can think what they want.

  23. Radiant says:

    Far cry was great. Until the aliens showed up and ruined the entire game.

    • Radiant says:

      But after they left the house and I got back to it the game was pretty good.

  24. buzzmong says:

    “Play the shooter that launched a legacy”
    *Installs Doom*

  25. captain nemo says:

    Love FarCry 1. But will not give money to Ubisoft. Period.

  26. PopeRatzo says:

    Wait, “overrated”? If I remember correctly, RPS was doing a lot of the Blood Dragon overrating. I’m pretty sure there were some jeans creamed around here over that game.

  27. robotslave says:

    That draw distance… my land, that draw distance.

    And then to take that technical feat and marry it to mechanics that suited it so damned well, like the hang gliding (and yes, the iron sights). I do get the argument that Far Cry 2 was the brilliant one, because of the ways it came up with to take some of that away from you. But for me, the mind-blowing one was the first.

  28. Jams O'Donnell says:

    One thing I really liked about Far Cry was the way they portrayed the day/night cycle, with each level being a little bit later than the previous. The night missions were especially tense and atmospheric, and the introduction of a day/night cycle makes me worry it won’t be like that in Classic. I’m skeptical.

    In the big Half Life 2 vs Doom 3 FPS showdown* I thought that Far Cry was the winner (just as Half Life was the winner in Quake 2 vs Unreal). It was a tremendous game, and I must have played it through seven or eight times, each time finding new routes through the levels and discovering new things. It was the perfect midpoint between linear and open world.

    * which may or may not have been entirely in my head

  29. corinoco says:

    For me, Far Cry 2 is the best of the series. 1 was brilliant graphically, and was best in the open early levels (stumbling across an overgrown wrecked AM6 Zero was a magical moment) but got very corridor-shooter esque in later levels.

    Far Cry 3 disturbs me greatly, perhaps most for the wholesale animal slaughter – I have no problem shooting g people though.

    Far Cry 2 was a brilliantly dark political statement about the First Worlds relationship with the Third World, and the morality of interference in other nation’s wars. The entire game takes a neutral stance, letting the player decide whether they are there for justice, money or fun. Each little set piece was brilliant, allowing for all sorts of emergent mayhem; the mechanic of ‘buddies’ saving you was done really well, with some nasty little moral conundrums when you had to save them.

    I also loved the unreliable nature of poorly maintained weapons – nothing scared you more than having an RPG misfire, leaving a hissing, flaming grenade spinning at your feet, setting fire to the gas tanks next to you.

  30. strangeloup says:

    Far Cry 3 seemed to come from the same stable of design as Assassin’s Creed 3, in that the focus was on their BIG IMPORTANT STORY rather than being in any way interesting or fun, as well as giving you five million sort-of-optional side activities, 95% of which were shite.

    I’m glad that with AssFlag, they decided to let you have buckets of fun being a pirate and only occasionally bring pesky things like storyline into it. Given that John also rated (imo) utter stinkers like Dead Island and Kingdoms of Amalur, I’m just going to assume that in terms of games we are going to hold the exact opposite opinion in most cases. Which is fine!

    • KenTWOu says:

      The way you described AssFlag… It seemed to come from the same stable of design as Far Cry 3.

  31. hypercrisis says:

    It’s worth pointing out that the console and PC versions of Far Cry 1 are different. The console version is a lot more action-y, and you as the player develop the Trigen powers, which I don’t believe happens in the PC version. The levels are also smaller, if I remember correctly. I could be wrong of course it’s been a long time.