I have a better idea--how about they work on a sequel to Crysis instead? The cliffhanger was bullshit on a stick, and frankly I did not care for either of the Far Cry games.
Wait what ? you think Ubisoft is a subsidiary of EA ?TitsMcGee1804 said:ubisoft dont seem too much like idiots to remake farcry 2 with its bad points intact
but they are an EA subsidary so I wont be holding my breath
True but I meant a real follow up to gta4: y'know something with an all new map, all new music, and different decade.arc1991 said:they did make a follow up lol, GTA stories of liberty city or somethingGonzoGamer said:Shocking!
Next you'll be telling us they're making a follow up to gta4.
I just don't know which one I'm looking forward to less.
FC2 wasn't a bad game, I just couldn't get into it.
um Far Cry 2 is done by Ubisoft and Crysis is done by Crytek. They don't work together.dbrose said:I have a better idea--how about they work on a sequel to Crysis instead? The cliffhanger was bullshit on a stick, and frankly I did not care for either of the Far Cry games.
wouldyoukindly99 said:It's in my top 3 as well.ColdStorage said:What flaws would that be?wouldyoukindly99 said:Same here, I just hope they fix the flaws of it's predecessor.coldalarm said:I actually really liked FC2, so I've got high hopes!
I love it, its in my top 3 games ever, I hated the respawning guard sites but after a while if you work around them I found it great fun traipsing cross country!.
Here would be the things I'd fix:
-Better story, the Jackal was a cool character but they barely used him at all. They could also expand more on the immorality of mercenaries and war and the people who get caught in the middle like they tried to do in FC2, but fell short on. This also means giving the factions (If there are any in FC3) more defined personalities and goals.
-More diverse mission types, I want more missions than "Blow 'dis shit up." or "Kill dat dude." I'd like to have missions that can be solved mulitple ways also.
-Fix the "Stealth kills" with the machete, everytime I did one of those the guy would just fall to the floor screaming and alert his buddies in the area, instant and silent kills please.
-Friendly AI, if you are working for one faction they should help you, not try to blow you to Oblivion and back.
-Weapon jamming, make it less frequent.
-Take out the malaria thing, seriously I'm all for giving your character weaknesses to make things challenging but that was just annoying.
-Being saved by buddies, I thought it made things too easy. You should be able to tell them "Come with me." and they could get in the gunner seat of your Jeep or something but if you die you die.
-Doing missions for buddies, what was the point? I really didn't see why I should do mission for them, I did them regardless for the fun.
Thoughts? Anything to add?
unless im grossly mis-informed, ill wiki it...Mekado said:Wait what ? you think Ubisoft is a subsidiary of EA ?TitsMcGee1804 said:ubisoft dont seem too much like idiots to remake farcry 2 with its bad points intact
but they are an EA subsidary so I wont be holding my breath
...are you high ?
They're up to 25% shares as of 2007, but "Electronic Arts said it reserves the right to raise its stake in Ubisoft, depending on market conditions, over the next year. It has no plans to seek to nominate board members" they have no usable voting rights whatsoever, and no board members in Ubisoft, so no decisive power at all (although they could take some if they wanted to)TitsMcGee1804 said:unless im grossly mis-informed, ill wiki it...Mekado said:Wait what ? you think Ubisoft is a subsidiary of EA ?TitsMcGee1804 said:ubisoft dont seem too much like idiots to remake farcry 2 with its bad points intact
but they are an EA subsidary so I wont be holding my breath
...are you high ?
'Electronic Arts purchased a 19.9% stake in the firm, an action Ubisoft referred to as "hostile" on EA's part'
okay so not grossly misinformed, but they aint a subsidary, just a stakeholder, but im definately not high
basically, EA are the disease, and ubisoft has only has HIV not full-blown AIDS
they get to stick their ore in somewhere down the production cycle for sure
Hmm... I wonder why they don't put in the extra 5-10 percent and start becoming a preferred shareholder... I mean, they're straddling that ledge, and they still wouldn't hold majority votes. But no, EA has never expressed interest in toying with UBIsoft. I can't remember when it was, but in an interview, a representative of EA actually asnwered this very question and said "They come out with innovative, exciting, and visually pleasant games on their own, we see no reason to jump in and offer ideas or solutions, they've done great all on their own." (not an exact quote obviously, but as close as I can remember).Mekado said:They're up to 25% shares as of 2007, but "Electronic Arts said it reserves the right to raise its stake in Ubisoft, depending on market conditions, over the next year. It has no plans to seek to nominate board members" they have no usable voting rights whatsoever, and no board members in Ubisoft, so no decisive power at all (although they could take some if they wanted to)TitsMcGee1804 said:unless im grossly mis-informed, ill wiki it...Mekado said:Wait what ? you think Ubisoft is a subsidiary of EA ?TitsMcGee1804 said:ubisoft dont seem too much like idiots to remake farcry 2 with its bad points intact
but they are an EA subsidary so I wont be holding my breath
...are you high ?
'Electronic Arts purchased a 19.9% stake in the firm, an action Ubisoft referred to as "hostile" on EA's part'
okay so not grossly misinformed, but they aint a subsidary, just a stakeholder, but im definately not high
basically, EA are the disease, and ubisoft has only has HIV not full-blown AIDS
they get to stick their ore in somewhere down the production cycle for sure
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2007/08/08/afx3998595.html
I sure hope it's never going to happen though, it's never good to have a quasi-monopoly, in any market.There's already very few major game developpers that puts out quality products...
And it's an intelligent move from a business standpoint, seeing as they get part of Ubisoft's profits without the slightest effort, well, apart from the few millions they put in the company obviously but they still profit from every Ubisoft's game sale...Celtic_Kerr said:Hmm... I wonder why they don't put in the extra 5-10 percent and start becoming a preferred shareholder... I mean, they're straddling that ledge, and they still wouldn't hold majority votes. But no, EA has never expressed interest in toying with UBIsoft. I can't remember when it was, but in an interview, a representative of EA actually asnwered this very question and said "They come out with innovative, exciting, and visually pleasant games on their own, we see no reason to jump in and offer ideas or solutions, they've done great all on their own." (not an exact quote obviously, but as close as I can remember).Mekado said:They're up to 25% shares as of 2007, but "Electronic Arts said it reserves the right to raise its stake in Ubisoft, depending on market conditions, over the next year. It has no plans to seek to nominate board members" they have no usable voting rights whatsoever, and no board members in Ubisoft, so no decisive power at all (although they could take some if they wanted to)TitsMcGee1804 said:unless im grossly mis-informed, ill wiki it...Mekado said:Wait what ? you think Ubisoft is a subsidiary of EA ?TitsMcGee1804 said:ubisoft dont seem too much like idiots to remake farcry 2 with its bad points intact
but they are an EA subsidary so I wont be holding my breath
...are you high ?
'Electronic Arts purchased a 19.9% stake in the firm, an action Ubisoft referred to as "hostile" on EA's part'
okay so not grossly misinformed, but they aint a subsidary, just a stakeholder, but im definately not high
basically, EA are the disease, and ubisoft has only has HIV not full-blown AIDS
they get to stick their ore in somewhere down the production cycle for sure
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2007/08/08/afx3998595.html
I sure hope it's never going to happen though, it's never good to have a quasi-monopoly, in any market.There's already very few major game developpers that puts out quality products...
EA seems to know that with all the new and creative games UBIsoft makes, jumping in would basically be like setting fire to an entire rainforest and dance around it naked... Abomination!
God of War III is my dissapointment. Not even the game, just the ending. It's just such a WTF moment...Mekado said:And it's an intelligent move from a business standpoint, seeing as they get part of Ubisoft's profits without the slightest effort, well, apart from the few millions they put in the company obviously but they still profit from every Ubisoft's game sale...Celtic_Kerr said:Hmm... I wonder why they don't put in the extra 5-10 percent and start becoming a preferred shareholder... I mean, they're straddling that ledge, and they still wouldn't hold majority votes. But no, EA has never expressed interest in toying with UBIsoft. I can't remember when it was, but in an interview, a representative of EA actually asnwered this very question and said "They come out with innovative, exciting, and visually pleasant games on their own, we see no reason to jump in and offer ideas or solutions, they've done great all on their own." (not an exact quote obviously, but as close as I can remember).Mekado said:They're up to 25% shares as of 2007, but "Electronic Arts said it reserves the right to raise its stake in Ubisoft, depending on market conditions, over the next year. It has no plans to seek to nominate board members" they have no usable voting rights whatsoever, and no board members in Ubisoft, so no decisive power at all (although they could take some if they wanted to)TitsMcGee1804 said:unless im grossly mis-informed, ill wiki it...Mekado said:Wait what ? you think Ubisoft is a subsidiary of EA ?TitsMcGee1804 said:ubisoft dont seem too much like idiots to remake farcry 2 with its bad points intact
but they are an EA subsidary so I wont be holding my breath
...are you high ?
'Electronic Arts purchased a 19.9% stake in the firm, an action Ubisoft referred to as "hostile" on EA's part'
okay so not grossly misinformed, but they aint a subsidary, just a stakeholder, but im definately not high
basically, EA are the disease, and ubisoft has only has HIV not full-blown AIDS
they get to stick their ore in somewhere down the production cycle for sure
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2007/08/08/afx3998595.html
I sure hope it's never going to happen though, it's never good to have a quasi-monopoly, in any market.There's already very few major game developpers that puts out quality products...
EA seems to know that with all the new and creative games UBIsoft makes, jumping in would basically be like setting fire to an entire rainforest and dance around it naked... Abomination!
And gamers are a ...whiny bunch, some people would swear on their life never to buy an EA game, but they'd buy Ubisoft, that way EA can get some money from people who wouldn't willingly spend on EA products (EA and Ubisoft as examples, every single game developper has some gamers pissed off at them).
Sorry, but original PC-only FarCry had no mutant powers. If you liked that console version, you owe it to yourself to play the original. One of the hardest yet funnest games I've ever played.L3m0n_L1m3 said:Maybe with a little luck they'll go back to the original Farcry format, with all the awesome badass-ery and super powers.
This guy gets it. Especially since all those respawning fights that everybody seemed to hate, I started to look forward to about a third of the way through the game, once I knew the map well enough. You realize something about yourself when you're flanking around the side of a guardpost, and you could easily evade the fight altogether...and then you chuck your Molotov and start the gunfight anyway. I once burned down a forest searching for the last injured man in a gang of ambushers, only to turn around in time to see him steal my boat and escape. I once sat on top of a mountain a mile away from a guardpost, sniped the lead driver of a convoy, then killed all two dozen of the men looking for me without any of them figuring out where the bullets were coming from, without relocating. FC2 let you have so many unique experiences, things you wouldn't get in any other game. In that game, you are meant to welcome the appearance of new enemies. You are supposed to play like a predator.BlindChance said:That mission was the point, in a nutshell. The whole concept of Far Cry 2 was to strip away the logic and sense, piece by piece, until by the end of it you're actively working against your own interests.TOGSolid said:destroying a supply of malaria medication!?!?! WHAT!?
As the Jackal says, "Violence is a disease." Violence is nonsensical. Violence is brutal. It isn't heroic. It isn't ever justified. And it spreads without check.
Far Cry 2 got that.
I'm nervous about Far Cry 3 because I can't see how they'll recapture that lightning. Far Cry 2 was so damned intelligent.