Far Cry:Primal

[TechBoyJK]

Far Cry Primal is a full-fledged single player experience that will take gamers to 10,000 BC in history to a time when massive beasts like the woolly mammoth and sabretooth tiger ruled the Earth.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=851-glDwhfw

Looks amazing. I loved the 'wilderness' aspects of the past 2 Far Cry games. Big Game Hunting. Going back so far in time, removing the modern weaponry and gadgets, should really enhance the hunting experience. Plus the various voodoo tribes and warriors to fight. Should be cool.

My only concern is a potential lack of weaponry... or will voodoo magic play a role?

 

[Zenoth]

A triple-A FC4 mod I see, could be fun I suppose. They must have been working on Primal during FC4's development, otherwise they'd only have spent 14 months on it. You just can't do a brand new full game in 14 months unless it's a glorified mod of the previous installment.

It doesn't mean it'll suck, by the way, because they actually did a great job (in my opinion) with Blood Dragon (which is basically just a mod for FC3 that wasn't made by just one guy posting it over on Far Cry Nexus). I'm just saying that Primal will most likely not have much to distinguish itself from either FC3 or FC4, other than the obvious time period setting. And, yes, I do expect lone sabre tooth tigers killing an entire 'outpost''s worth of primitives without much challenge thanks to never-evolving A.I., it's going to be fantastic...

And I wonder if the radio towers will be replaced by mountain tops or sequoia trees. Really now, I think I'll wait for Far Cry: Cretaceous (A.K.A Turok 2017).

 

[Firsttime]

I'm interested. I enjoyed FC4, I actually enjoy using the bows far more then the guns, the stealth take downs and long range bow shots are so satisfying. I really hope this game emphasizes those combat aspects. Also the wild animals should be huge and intense. I hope working with the no guns limitations gives them some room to explore the core mechanics of the Far Cry games.

 

[brokEN2]

A triple-A FC4 mod I see, could be fun I suppose. They must have been working on Primal during FC4's development, otherwise they'd only have spent 14 months on it. You just can't do a brand new full game in 14 months unless it's a glorified mod of the previous installment.

It doesn't mean it'll suck, by the way, because they actually did a great job (in my opinion) with Blood Dragon (which is basically just a mod for FC3 that wasn't made by just one guy posting it over on Far Cry Nexus). I'm just saying that Primal will most likely not have much to distinguish itself from either FC3 or FC4, other than the obvious time period setting. And, yes, I do expect lone sabre tooth tigers killing an entire 'outpost''s worth of primitives without much challenge thanks to never-evolving A.I., it's going to be fantastic...

And I wonder if the radio towers will be replaced by mountain tops or sequoia trees. Really now, I think I'll wait for Far Cry: Cretaceous (A.K.A Turok 2017).

Yea I mean I love the Far Cry games but at this point Im guessing pretty much everything you say is gonna be spot on and it almost feels like they are milking it at this point. I remember them taking a poll and if I remember correctly everyone wanted a Far Cry with Dinosaurs so whatever happened to that?! I have been wanting that ever since I saw the Jurassic Park mod for the first Far Cry

 

[Atomic Playboy]

At what point does it become idiotic that they're using the Far Cry name for this? The first Far Cry was about strange genetic experiments and monsters on an island. Then they went more realistic (albeit campy) for excursions into Africa, Southeast Asia and the Himalayas. Sure, they were ridiculous and over-the-top, but no genetically-modified monsters. Now they're going 10,000 years in the past? What ties these games together? Different plots, different protagonists, and now wildly different time periods? Is Ubisoft so terrified of the principle of a new IP that they have to brand every new idea as an existing series? "We've got this awesome idea for a pirate game..." "GREAT, we'll call it Assassin's Creed IV. Throw some mystical nonsense and climbable towers in it."

 

[TechBoyJK]

At what point does it become idiotic that they're using the Far Cry name for this? The first Far Cry was about strange genetic experiments and monsters on an island. Then they went more realistic (albeit campy) for excursions into Africa, Southeast Asia and the Himalayas. Sure, they were ridiculous and over-the-top, but no genetically-modified monsters. Now they're going 10,000 years in the past? What ties these games together? Different plots, different protagonists, and now wildly different time periods? Is Ubisoft so terrified of the principle of a new IP that they have to brand every new idea as an existing series? "We've got this awesome idea for a pirate game..." "GREAT, we'll call it Assassin's Creed IV. Throw some mystical nonsense and climbable towers in it."

My guess is it's about a character over-coming adversity in a situation where success seems to be a 'far cry' away.

And even looking at the original, that's really the only applicable reason to call that one Far Cry as well.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

My guess is it's about a character over-coming adversity in a situation where success seems to be a 'far cry' away.

And even looking at the original, that's really the only applicable reason to call that one Far Cry as well.

Who cares why they named the first one what they did; a name doesn't need to make sense to establish a series. Far Cry 2 had no relation to the first game to begin with, being developed by a completely different studio and making use of the name solely as a marketing gimmick. Every subsequent game has been a sequel to Far Cry 2 moreso than Far Cry; so why suddenly ditch guns and modernity and travel through time for the next one? If I made some real-time strategy about a renegade angel trying to save Heaven and called it "Halo 6," people might get a little confused as to what on Earth that had to do with the completely unrelated Halo series. A game about a caveman trying to survive in the wilderness sounds like it could easily be interesting... but why brand it with an existing IP that it ostensibly has nothing in common with? Maybe I'm being cynical, but given Ubisoft's history on this front, it feels like a crass marketing tool rather than a sensible tie-in to existing lore.

Me, I'm already looking forward to Ubisoft's next big release; a racing game, where a young Iranian royal must battle for his people's freedom by using his father's vast fleet of supercars to win a series of races. Get ready for Prince of Persia: Full Throttle.

 

[KentState]

How many arrows will it take to kill something? I remember unloading a full magazine to kill a badger in Farcry 4.

 

[b-mac]

I really enjoyed Blood Dragon and was hoping for a second one but this does look interesting.

 

[BSim500]

Is Ubisoft so terrified of the principle of a new IP that they have to brand every new idea as an existing series?

In short, yes : "We only do franchises and then sequel them to death. Fresh-feeling new stuff is too risky / expensive for us"
http://www.pcgamesn.com/ubisoft-we-won-t-start-game-unless-we-can-franchise-it

I don't hate Ubisoft games, but am very much "burned out" on playing exactly the same "tower climbing simulator with one gimmick" (hunting / smart-phone / pirates) game with exactly the same mechanics over & over, and only interchangeable texture packs & back-stories being "different" (which is what we used to call an "expansion pack")... Played FC3 - it was "OK". Didn't bother with FC4, probably won't with FC5 (due 2016), FC6 (due 2017), FC34 (due 2045), FC719 (due 2730), etc. :biggrin:

 

[tidy]

.

 

[Silverforce11]

Something different, I like it.

 

[DeathReborn]

Looks like the concept would play well in MP. I am gonna wait for more info before committing to buying this one though.

 

[moonbogg]

Far Cry 4 didn't hold my interest at all. I can't bring myself to play it. I tried, but I just can't do it. Its an unforgiveable waste of my life to play that game, and now they want me to run around with a spear? That's not a FarCry game.
Oh boy, I think I'm getting old. These games are starting to REALLY feel like the waste of time that they usually are. If I'm not competing against other players, I feel like I'm just jerking around with myself.

 

[Skott]

I like the concept and theme. I'll keep my eyes on this one come 02.23.16

 

[Texashiker]

Looks awesome.

Looks like Rust set 10,000 years ago

 

[darkewaffle]

Can't wait. FC3/FCBD/FC4 have been three of the best and most fun games I've played in recent memory. I already like the formula, even if it's just a lot of the same ideas repackaged with a new look/enemies/weapons/places then I'll still have a blast. I just hope it still has some story elements to it and it's not purely survival/hunter-gathering.

 

[TechBoyJK]

Can't wait. FC3/FCBD/FC4 have been three of the best and most fun games I've played in recent memory. I already like the formula, even if it's just a lot of the same ideas repackaged with a new look/enemies/weapons/places then I'll still have a blast. I just hope it still has some story elements to it and it's not purely survival/hunter-gathering.

I have similar thoughts about the formula. I like it. I just hope they stick with it, and keep refining it along the way. I look forward to Far Cry 7. Whatever it may be, assuming they stick with the formula. I'd love for them to go back to Africa.

 

[DeathReborn]

I know they have done jungle already but a game set in central/southern America during the time of the Aztecs & Mayans would be pretty good, rather that than Africa again tbh.

 

[darkewaffle]

Aztec/Maya/Inca are compelling but I think that might also end up feeling a bit too similar to the Rakyat.

I think the Bronze Age/Mesopotamia is an underutilized setting with potential.

 

[werepossum]

Who cares why they named the first one what they did; a name doesn't need to make sense to establish a series. Far Cry 2 had no relation to the first game to begin with, being developed by a completely different studio and making use of the name solely as a marketing gimmick. Every subsequent game has been a sequel to Far Cry 2 moreso than Far Cry; so why suddenly ditch guns and modernity and travel through time for the next one? If I made some real-time strategy about a renegade angel trying to save Heaven and called it "Halo 6," people might get a little confused as to what on Earth that had to do with the completely unrelated Halo series. A game about a caveman trying to survive in the wilderness sounds like it could easily be interesting... but why brand it with an existing IP that it ostensibly has nothing in common with? Maybe I'm being cynical, but given Ubisoft's history on this front, it feels like a crass marketing tool rather than a sensible tie-in to existing lore.

Me, I'm already looking forward to Ubisoft's next big release; a racing game, where a young Iranian royal must battle for his people's freedom by using his father's vast fleet of supercars to win a series of races. Get ready for Prince of Persia: Full Throttle.

What? I thought that game was gonna be Far Cry 6: Royal Blood Draggin'.

 

[XiandreX]

My guess is it's about a character over-coming adversity in a situation where success seems to be a 'far cry' away.

And even looking at the original, that's really the only applicable reason to call that one Far Cry as well.

Thanks I needed a good chuckle

 

[gorcorps]

Who cares why they named the first one what they did; a name doesn't need to make sense to establish a series. Far Cry 2 had no relation to the first game to begin with, being developed by a completely different studio and making use of the name solely as a marketing gimmick. Every subsequent game has been a sequel to Far Cry 2 moreso than Far Cry; so why suddenly ditch guns and modernity and travel through time for the next one? If I made some real-time strategy about a renegade angel trying to save Heaven and called it "Halo 6," people might get a little confused as to what on Earth that had to do with the completely unrelated Halo series. A game about a caveman trying to survive in the wilderness sounds like it could easily be interesting... but why brand it with an existing IP that it ostensibly has nothing in common with? Maybe I'm being cynical, but given Ubisoft's history on this front, it feels like a crass marketing tool rather than a sensible tie-in to existing lore.

Me, I'm already looking forward to Ubisoft's next big release; a racing game, where a young Iranian royal must battle for his people's freedom by using his father's vast fleet of supercars to win a series of races. Get ready for Prince of Persia: Full Throttle.

You are... This is exactly the type of stuff they pull with Assassin's Creed. They have the core gameplay, and they mess around with the time period to keep things "fresh". We've had two tropical island type of far crys in a row now, so they need something different. It will still be a FPS and probably handle very much like FarCry 4's bow weapons. It's not like they're changing the game type... so your example doesn't make any sense.

 

[Nebor]

I loved the 1st, 3rd and 4th Far Cry but I have no interest in playing a Far Cry without guns.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

You are... This is exactly the type of stuff they pull with Assassin's Creed. They have the core gameplay, and they mess around with the time period to keep things "fresh". We've had two tropical island type of far crys in a row now, so they need something different. It will still be a FPS and probably handle very much like FarCry 4's bow weapons. It's not like they're changing the game type... so your example doesn't make any sense.

A first person shooter without firearms is a pretty drastic change. That's like the next Forza being a bicycle racer. I'm not saying it's going to be a bad game; I think it has the potential to be awesome, and definitely unique in a field of games that's getting bogged down in military-style FPSes. But I don't think it needs the Far Cry license to be successful. If anything, that's a knock against it, because it hampers the development of a new series if it happens to be a great game.