Xbox 360 » Action » Shooter » First-Person » Modern

Far Cry 3

My God, the multiplayer is actually brilliant.

Back To: Board List | Topic List | Topic Archived
First | Page 2 of 2
cheese785
Posted 1/6/2013 4:45:01 PM
weapon_d00d816 posted...
Nailbomb posted...
JKPSP posted...
I don't play or like CoD to compare it to, so yeah.


Don't fall for the troll. This game is nothing like CoD unless you think every modern-ish day shooter is a CoD clone.

That being said...

Yes, it is brilliant, when it decides to work right. I wouldn't hold out any hope of the online getting improved at all, though, what with it being a Ubisoft game and all. I still love the map editor and player map battles. That's currently the best thing you could have for a console shooter.


I'm not trolling. And it is pretty sad that so many modern shooters have to follow this trend. FarCry 3 actually follows closer to CoD's setup than most other modern shooters to be honest. If you count the decoding system and a few different gametypes as being "different", then that's just stupid.


Exactly. Everything, including the ranking system, weapon unlock/upgrade system, perks, game types, and even general game play/physics are all very similar to a COD game. Hell, they even have the narrator with a generic accent yelling stuff like "Capture the objectives!" over a radio when the matches start.

I'm not saying that being a COD clone makes it bad, I'm just saying that it's pretty clearly (at least to me) a COD clone.
---
\m/
berriesisdead
Posted 1/6/2013 7:14:42 PM
Offline system link MP with custom maps is what i'm doing. Sure you only get two to a screen but theres no lag and you can make maps small enough to be perfect for 2on2.
---
www.facebook.com/berriesisdead
Santa_Gavin
Posted 1/6/2013 7:18:25 PM
Anyone not want there uplay pass? all I want it for is to get 1000/1000 in far cry 3. I already reach level 15
---
I am Santa_Gavin
I Donate Babies to the Gavin Family
Bubba787
Posted 1/6/2013 9:05:14 PM
Why must everyone measure a game's quality on how similar it is to a "successful" game?

I'm not saying CoD is successful, the only one I immensely enjoyed playing was CoD 2 on PC (bolt-action servers were the best) and I stopped playing them after MW2 without touching the crap that treyarch makes in between. Sure their multiplayer formula works and appeals to a large fan-base. Many games have similar characteristics in multiplayer design like BF3, Halo 4, and of course FC3. None of that makes them clones. The only CoD clones are each of the "new" CoD games.

Having progession, unlucking, custamization features like CoD doesn't make any of these games better or worse. I mean, really the announcer voice is cloned? That was in FC2 as well...

Heck BF3 is leagues better because it handles these features better IMO. Having played FC3 multiplayer without playing CoD for a long while, well I really enjoyed it. I felt it was fresh; and, though its nowhere near as good as the most recent online FPS I've been playing, BF3, I too believe its pretty brilliant. The high point for me is the great map design. They're all very unique, well-thought out maps. They could use more variety in locale like FC 2's maps, but that's what the map editor community is for. And you can make maps of the exact same quality too. It's freaking great.

Anyways, my point is: play a game and judge it on its own. I find the less I compare a game to others, except maybe the prequel, the better I can make a judgement on how much I enjoy a game and its features.
---
MrPibbRules: Hey man, she has two tentacles...can't we share?
SSJGrimReaper: Well...okay. As long as we don't make eye contact it should be fine.
DeathMagnetic80
Posted 1/7/2013 12:30:53 AM
Bubba787 posted...
Why must everyone measure a game's quality on how similar it is to a "successful" game?

I'm not saying CoD is successful, the only one I immensely enjoyed playing was CoD 2 on PC (bolt-action servers were the best) and I stopped playing them after MW2 without touching the crap that treyarch makes in between. Sure their multiplayer formula works and appeals to a large fan-base. Many games have similar characteristics in multiplayer design like BF3, Halo 4, and of course FC3. None of that makes them clones. The only CoD clones are each of the "new" CoD games.

Having progession, unlucking, custamization features like CoD doesn't make any of these games better or worse. I mean, really the announcer voice is cloned? That was in FC2 as well...

Heck BF3 is leagues better because it handles these features better IMO. Having played FC3 multiplayer without playing CoD for a long while, well I really enjoyed it. I felt it was fresh; and, though its nowhere near as good as the most recent online FPS I've been playing, BF3, I too believe its pretty brilliant. The high point for me is the great map design. They're all very unique, well-thought out maps. They could use more variety in locale like FC 2's maps, but that's what the map editor community is for. And you can make maps of the exact same quality too. It's freaking great.

Anyways, my point is: play a game and judge it on its own. I find the less I compare a game to others, except maybe the prequel, the better I can make a judgement on how much I enjoy a game and its features.


There's no reason to not say CoD is successful... it's pretty obvious that the franchise is.
---
RIP A7X71180 4/14/2006-12/24/2011
2012 San Diego Chargers 7-9
Jump to Page: 1  2  
First | Page 2 of 2