I forced myself to finish 5. Didn't really enjoy the story or the scripted parts. Every far cry game has been the same for me. Cool for about 3-4 hours then it's repetitive. I was watching one review yesterday where they showed gunplay and some third person views at times. I guess they tried to change the style up a little. Weapons looked new and fun.
Far Cry 1 is the only game thats different, and it was made by CryTek. All the rest were made by Ubisoft, and Ubisoft likes to extend gameplay by introducing boring, repetitive elements.
Far Cry 2 didnt have cash, only diamonds. And you had to chase down those friggen things with a stupid little GPS minigame. Very annoying.
Far Cry 3 was probably the least annoying. Too many towers but that was it.
Far Cry 4 had towers, AND annoying dream/drug sequences, and the annoying arena, which you are only forced to do once but still, and way too many scripted cutscenes that couldnt be avoided, and the alternate reality set in ancient times. It was a fun game overall but had too much nonsense.
Far Cry 5 to me was actually much better. Most cutscenes could be skipped, you could take almost anything at your own pace, they were a little stingy with the money, and they pushed the in-game purchases too much (those damn silver bars) but overall I was fine with it. Oh, and the forced sequences when your resistance points got too high, those were annoying. Still overall better than Far Cry 4.
Primal and New Dawn were both garbage, but in retrospect that should have been obvious from the trailers.
No, like most other long standing franchises with too many entries, more than half the games are relatively bad.
The Battlefield Series is an even worse offender.
BUT, FC6 looks to be not only good, but popular with the fans.