Far Cry DNA 'Lost' - Crytek

NowGamer - Speaking to NowGamer, Crytek revealed that Far Cry would be a different title had they kept on to the rights for the game.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
BlmThug2681d ago

I Like The Current Far Cry Games More Than The Aline Version

Gunshot2681d ago

I thought I was the only one.

limewax2681d ago

Nope Far Cry is actually going back to its roots in a sense whereas Crysis made the worst possible departure locale-wise.

Far Cry also garnered a lot more attention and got a better reception at E3 2011 than Crysis 2 did at E3 2010. Even the guy who presented Far Cry 3 (forgot his name) actually played into the lore well himself. The game has this brilliant mysterious feel to it. I personally think its going to be one of the best games we see this gen, along with others in 2012. It actually seems 2012 could finally be the generations peak

Gray-Fox-Type02681d ago

True Far Cry 2 was terrible game with great graphics. However Far Cry 3 does look very good!

Did i ever tell you the definition of insanity?

limewax2680d ago

Although I agreed, I personally wouldn't call it a terrible game. It had some very serious flaws yes, and even a rather problematic (though easily fixable) game breaker. I personally thought the game was only a few codes from being fantastic.

1.No respawning guard camps
2.Wear and tear on cars/boats and guns reduced.
3.No malaria or a more bearable system like double the pills per go.
4.Dangerous animal AI including natural selection with increased animal spawn and variety
5.Enemy AI threat detection range decreased and threat direction detection improved

I admit its not exactly a short list, but such things are not that hard to achieve

Gray-Fox-Type02680d ago

I agreed with you, as i had alot of fun with the map editor. The free roaming in the african jungles was amazing. But hated it how enemies spawn from nowhere and give you chase and how do they spot me from a mile away, in dense vegetation and pin point me right after i fire one sniper shot lol

HeavenlySnipes2680d ago

I gave up because the AI would be in the thick ass foliage and shoot you up without you being able to see them. Also, EVERY 5 SECONDS, a buggy with a gunner (usually two buggies with a gunner) will ambush you and blow up your car. I don't know how many times I'd have to run from the AI's pinpoint accuracy. Then have my gun die on me.... :(

gypsygib2680d ago

Totally agree, FC2 was a few gameplay tweaks from being amazing - complete fail on the testers part.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2680d ago
ATiElite2680d ago

that's right

Crytek should only worry about Crysis and how it lost it's DNA.

Far Cry is an all time classic.

limewax2680d ago

Crytek need to worry about CryEngine 2 and 3. Don't get me wrong they look fantastic, But considering both are integral PC FPS games you would expect the engines to have been more stable.

Its rather sad that the amount of engines with stability problems has increased so drastically actually in one gen of consoles. I can't speak for too many PC games of old, but from what I remember, if you were getting 60FPS, you didn't drop to 15-20 just because of the game

Ares842681d ago (Edited 2681d ago )

I think the new Far Cry is much much better than what CryTek made. Why does CryTek needs to put aliens and monsters into every game they make is beyond me. It's much better with just people in it as enemies.

Oh and, you can create colorful enemies without using aliens and monsters. Just look at what they did in Far Cry 3.

Oldsnake0072681d ago

you only saw a 10 minute gameplay movie of far cry 3 and are already judging it.

How do you know that -FC3 won't have monsters or aliens ?

Ares842680d ago

Point taken.

I'm just going by Far Cry 2 which didn't have any monsters or aliens and I think if FC3 had any it might have been shown in the trailer.

Regardless, That trailer of Far Cry 3 was amazing and the best thing I've seen at E3.

qwertyz2681d ago (Edited 2681d ago )

far cry 1 was epic VERY VERY epic crytek should have held on to the IP. farcry 1 was FAR FAR more interesting than farcry 2

Statix2680d ago (Edited 2680d ago )

The thing is, Far Cry 3 looks like it captures the spirit and feel of the original Far Cry more than Crysis 1 or 2 did.

The gameplay demo of Far Cry 3 really impressed me. It looks like Ubisoft is trying really hard to recapture the whole "stranded on a tropical island full of deadly mercs" feeling of FC1. You know the original awe you felt when you first booted up Far Cry and saw the huge, beautiful vistas, long draw distances, and enemy AI scattered all over the place? From everything I've read and heard, Ubisoft appears keen on recapturing that same sort of magic. I sure as hell would rather play Far Cry 3 than Crysis 2 (and probably 3).

Pintheshadows2680d ago (Edited 2680d ago )

Far Cry 3 looks like Far Cry 2 if that makes sense.

It doesn't. I mean it looks more like a proper sequel to the original.

TheIneffableBob2681d ago

Just wondering, have the people who say Far Cry 2 is better than Far Cry actually played Far Cry?

Compared to Far Cry, FC2 is kinda ass. It had some decent ideas and they were fun for a while, but the game devolved into monotony about half way through. Not a whole lot of variety despite being open world and sooooo much driving. Far Cry was a cohesive and solid shooter that did great job at having open levels without being open world.

Statix2680d ago

The atmosphere and polish of Far Cry 1 combined with the open-world, go-anywhere structure of Far Cry 2 would be the ideal combination.

Hopefully the third installment in the series will meet that goal.

Hockeydud192680d ago

Does that include Far Cry Instincts and Predator? I'm thinking of picking that game up for the 360 possibly. I like Far cry 2 a lot, but only for the open world. The campaign is pointless to me.

Show all comments (24)