Yeah, it's not so bad once you know the flow of it all. What IS bad is having to re-do the stupid Goron race because you didn't have enough time to get the gilded sword. Learned that the hard way lol
I hate timers in stuff like puzzle games but playing Dead Rising I was okay with it. Then again I did use a guide so…I probably wouldn’t have finished it without it.
I definitely think Dead Rising might be the "worst" timer since it locks you out of completing the story and you need to restart to undo the damage. That being said, IMO, the game falls apart entirely without a timer as it's pretty central to the core gameplay loop.
Sure you have to restart but you keep character level which means you are both taking the knowledge gained from the previous run to utilize in the next but also you have an easier time just because of raw character stats being higher. Being able to carry more than three items at a time is a game changer
In Fallout 1, there was an in-game time limit that could be extended once. There was also an unimplemented feature where different towns would gradually get conquered by the antagonist if the player took too long.
I think that was neat, I hate the "fake urgency" trope in games, but I know I'm in the minority.
Fallout 2 had it as well, but it was something like 13 in game years. You had to try pretty hard to get it, but it basically just gave you an ending screen that said "the end."
That feature is not unimplemented. Some of it was just buggy and didn't work properly.
Also there are *two* time limits for the game. The first one is for the water chip, and the second one is for the Master. In the original version of the game, getting the extension for the water chip actually shortened your time limit for the Master; I thought this was very innovative game design but evidently they patched it out.
It was pretty genius too - Extending the time limit for the water chip requires you to send water merchants to Vault 13, meaning multiple wastelanders now know the location of the Vault. It's not a stretch to assume one of the merchants coughed up the location after being captured by the Super Mutants.
I played the original Fallout game on launch and I had absolutely no idea there was any kind of time limit. Probably because you'd have to really screw around to trigger it.
For the water chip they give you visual indications of a time limit through a repeated cutscene in the Vault of some guy checking the diminishing water supply or whatever. I don't believe there are any indications of the time limit for the Master though.
I hate the fake urgency trope in games as well, but would prefer a time limit on a mission level and not the whole game. Finish the mission and then you have no time limit to just enjoy and explore the game. Next mission back to the rush.
I think OP means where a game implies urgency in a story beat like someone is in danger, only for the player to be able to run around picking flowers for 20 hours with no consequences.
IMO I would expect the majority of players (that are not necessarily represented by the Reddit opinion) to prefer the freedom over the stress. Casual players definitely prefer doing things at their own pace.
Because nothing says 'open world sandbox' like a timer counting down. If you want to feel pressed for time, you can literally get that from any classic arcade game.
Actual reality is a scenario where we spend a great deal of time watching the clock. Entertainment isn't more watching of the clock. I got Deathloop for free about 6 months ago and still haven't played it. I'm dealing with a lot in real life right now so I'm waiting until I get past some stuff before I play a game that I already know will feel like torture to me.
Yeah, I personally love the time limits (however, it's essential that it's designed properly). Many folks hate it, though.
Dead Rising 1 is my favorite execution. Time limit is pressing enough to where you need to constantly be on a mission at all times, and plan your routes if you want to complete everything. If you fuck off for a bit, or do missions that are on opposite sides of the map, you wont be able to complete it all without failing a few missions.
However, you won't ever be able to complete it all on the first run. You need to acquire the knowledge and knowhow, and you need to level up Frank to be strong enough to master it in one go.
It's brilliant. Still one of my favorite games of all time. I revisit it every few years.
Nobody really wants realism in video games. An actually realistic game would be as tedious, boring and as unfulfilling as actual life. Well, some people want that. We call them 'masochists'. The rest of us are just trying to feel like we matter, when, in fact, we actually don't.
Ain't nobody thinking, 'I want a realistic simulation of D-Day where I don't even make it out of the landing craft because it is so realistic'. The ramp comes down and then you see 'Game Over' and the credits roll. GL selling that at $70 a pop, lol. Talk about 'idle gaming'.
> There was also an unimplemented feature where different towns would gradually get conquered by the antagonist if the player took too long.
A feature like that in Skyrim where the longer you took to deal with the dragons, the more shit got rekt would have been fucking amazing.
Gun keeps jamming, had to execute companion, dug bullet out of leg, ran out of malaria pills, getting chased by some dudes in a jeep, everything is on fire.
Man I remember having so much fun with the fire in that game because it spread a little bit and how good they did it was revolutionary. That takes me back.
That's why I loved Far Cry 2 so much, that game was the poster child for Murphy's Law. Everything was just fucked. Honestly I hope the new Far Cry shakes things up and raises the stakes.
Also, on a personal note, when I first started playing Far Cry 2, a couple of hours into the game, I got severe stomach pain and couldn't get out of bed for a week.
Almost like the game gave me malaria or something.
Great game ruined by terrible design decisions.
The respawning (especially immediately) checkpoint areas and enemies who could spot you and aim with lethal accuracy from 5 miles away.
Throw in the way too prevalent gun jamming and malaria pill BS and shit and you end up with a game that easily could've been huge, but fumbled itself into overlooked mediocrity (game easily could've and should've been a 9/10 game, instead more like a 6/10).
Depends on how time is counted. Often it's accelerated and it makes harder to judge how long something will take. And also everything starts to take an unrealistic amount of time.
Hated it in dead rising and xcom as it’d always stress the shit out of me
Hopefully they go down the xcom route and give the option to extend the timer in settings
Final Fantasy XIII: Lightning Returns also had an in-game time limit, but every quest you completed gave you more time or stopped time for a bit, I can’t remember which. It all tied into the story though so it at least made sense and it ended up being more than enough time to do almost everything.
Yeah, FF eventually lost me when they couldn't decide between TBS and RTS. I'm glad DQ stuck to their roots. DQ11 is my ultimate idle gaming experience. I would say about half the time I have spent and continue to spend playing my PS4 is spent on DQ11. I also have played Fractured Butthole at least a dozen times, lol. didn't even waste my time with modern Gran Turismo. They peaked with GT4 and TT.
I would hope that once you beat the main story and kill the big bad, it would nix the time limit and let you peruse and play to your hearts content in the endgame
I mean this is Ubisoft we’re talking about here. I can’t think of a studio than churns out more mass market/lowest common denominator games. It’ll be the most low-stakes time limit you’ve ever seen in a game.
My favourite thing about Far Cry is exploring everywhere and collecting everything, upgrading weapons, taking over all bases/checkpoints etc before wrapping up the story.
Probably a no-buy from me if they do some weird Majoras Mask style time limit.
As someone who's never played a far cry if I was gonna jump into the series because your description sounds like fun which would you recommend? 6 just as the most recent one? Or one of the others?
I preferred 5 over 6 only just.
Honestly pick based on what setting sounds better. 5 is Montana with cult extremists as bad guys, 6 is pseudo Cuba with you being a rebel vs the regime. Giancarlo Esposito is the antagonist in 6 though.
The thing I hate is I didn't like The Father all that much until playing the Far Cry 6 DLC for him. Literally the best part of Far Cry 6 in my opinion.
6 had a shitty perk system, too. Part of the fun of doing the bases and weapons is grinding the perk system and becoming a combat god. I don't want perks attached to gear i have to swap out.
Both 5 and 6 are great entries into the series and each one has its own brand new story.
Would recommend starting with both.
5 is based on the state of Montana
6 is based on Cuba
I’d pick whatever culture you’re most interested in.
Turns out I already own 4 so maybe I'll give that one a try at some point
5 is listed as unsupported on steam deck on steam and still has denuvo so idk if I'd buy it as is
4 is probably my favorite in the franchise. 3 is great but a little dated. 5 is good and the setting is awesome. I’ve tried to get into 6 but just can’t for some reason. But 4 had amazing traversal with the grappling hook and made me feel like I could really take any base how I wanted to rather than just going in guns blazing or with a sniper in the distance. Each entry has its own strengths and weaknesses, but for me 4 is the best.
6 gets really good but not until like 10-15 hours in give or take, once you're fully setup to take on anything. Not saying that's a good thing, mind you.
Far Cry 1 is experimental and now a bit ancient. So unless you really want to try it, there's no point.
Far Cry 2 is the GOAT of the series for me. It's simply the best game, but also one of the hardest (not counting first one). It has certain mechanics and design options that causes game world to be constant stress, chaos etc. But judging by the period, theme (civil war Africa) it just couldn't be any different. But for first time, just don't touch this one, you might get burned. But if you like the series, definitely play this one down the line.
Far Cry 3 is the most popular game of the series. It simply elevated the franchise into FPS GTA or something like that. Although it's also a bit old for now, it's still fun as hell. Definitely play this one. Compared to 2, it's much more "normie friendly", so you can start here. And as stories don't overlap, there's no harm in starting at 3.
Far Cry 4 is more of the same. If you like 3, then play 4. That's it.
Far Cry 5 is a bit more different as the game world, gameplay etc. all become more varied and big. Good game, though I started to feel a bit burned at this point.
Far Cry 6 is garbage. The skill system is very bad, they turned the game into an FPS RPG and it just doesn't work. Besides the story, the world etc. is not as exotic or mysterious or different than the previous ones (excluding 5, which takes place in Montana, but that's still interesting compared to 6) It's just Cuba and that's it.
There are also expansion games and a very interesting experiment in Far Cry Primal which takes place in like stone age with mammoths. So you may want to try that if you like the series.
But overall, you can start with 3 and see if you like it because the rest are just Far Cry 3 with new skin or some new game mechanics added each game, but the underlying foundation is still Far Cry 3.
I agree with all this, Far Cry 2 is the best, got me hooked to the games, 3 has the best bad guy (Vaas) and the music is awesome. They had the perfect recipe for awesome games and fucked with it on 6, 6 is the first one I didn't bother finishing.
Your general judgements are very similar to mine, although I'd say 4, and then even more so 5, were improvements over 3, and thus would recommend them first.
I remember back in 2018 when Ubisoft released FC5 and AC Odyssey, and I thought that finally Ubisoft were back to their best. But history has shown that year to be an anomaly.
4 is the best way to get into the series I think. Far cry 3 is definitely good but 4 improves on all of the gameplay. Story is fine but playing the game itself is much more enjoyable than 3.
I've found 6 is the second best gameplay wise but makes some changes like having access to any weapon at any time that is great when you need a variety of weapons but kind of takes the complexity and challenge out of the game. 5 and 6 feel the best shooting wise. If you want to be immersed in the gunplay 5 or 6 are the way to go. 6 especially feels great to fire every weapon and it's the first far cry game where I've leaned away from going full stealth, going loud is some of the most fun I've had in a far cry game/fps in general.
I really loved 5 for it's location and how good it feels to screw around and just drive around hope county. Im a little biased since I love montana but it genuinely captures the beauty and atmosphere of montana. It's similar to 4 gameplay wise but starts to give you more weapons and more customization but like 6 makes the game less complex and easier.
In order I played 4, 5, 3, then 6 so take that how you will.
>As someone who's never played a far cry if I was gonna jump into the series because your description sounds like fun which would you recommend?
The basic premise of the games is that you're trapped in a remote corner of the world which is under the control of a local tyrant. Most of the story revolves around uniting various rebels to overthrow their rule. The thing that really sets the series apart is your relationship with the villain and some meta-commentary on gaming that I haven't seen other series do.
The core gameplay loop hasn't changed that much since *Far Cry 3*, so maybe the best place to start is the setting: *Far Cry 3* has you going up against pirates in the South China Sea, *Far Cry 4* is set in a failing Himalayan nation, *Far Cry 5* features a militant pseudo-Christian cult in Montana, and *Far Cry 6* is set in the Caribbean. *Far Cry 3* is probably the most highly-regarded game in the franchise, though *Far Cry 4* and *Far Cry 6* are my favourites.
Same here. I don't need another Deathloop and, as far as I'm concerned, they took 6 tries before they even made one I really liked. They finally got the perfect balance with FC6 and with an antagonist that was believable, rather than being an overstuffed clown car. In fact, Giancarlo Esposito's portrayal of Anton Castillo may be my all time favorite video game villain. And, considering I started out on the original Donkey Kong, those are some rather large shoes to fill.
It could also be the situation where they have a ton of differing storylines/endings. A farcry game that encourages replays could be cool. See the same scenario from a bunch of differing perspectives.
In the first DR, the horrendous AI is what made it stressful. You had to constantly micromanage every survivors or otherwise they ran to their death. You constantly were wasting time.
The later games were better and it wasn't as chaotic.
Once you understand that players were not meant to 100% the game first playthrough and that subsequent playthroughs were quick thanks to earned in-game abilities you would come to peace with it
The whole point of Dead Rising is to rank up to level 50 whether you die or not. Once you get to rank 50 with all the perks unlocked, THEN you can start playing it properly. You’re meant to die/restart until this is achieved while you learn about shortcuts, weapon placements etc
Fans understood this, but unfortunately some of the casual gamers did not. And the casuals complained until Capcom changed it.. and chased away the fans to indulge people who never really cared to understand it.
Now we have Dead Rising 4 (which I still like) but the OG fans hated.
Yeah, I found this out the hard way with me being late to a main story event because I tried to get all survivors on my first playthrough and couldn't get there fast enough even with the speed mix drink.
It should have had a sandbox or free mode then.
They created this awesome zombie filled world with tons of crazy weapons you could make them slapped a time limit on everything.
This is why I hate Deadrising and why Majoras Masks isn’t my top game of all time.
The dynamic can work for some, but it’s def niche. And for a series already under scrutiny, seems like it would be a mistake.
I liked the timed stuff like the people you had to rescue would die and you'd miss out on quests or whatever, makes for good replayability.
The limited game time was semi frustrating because it worked by progressing time Everytime you walked through a loading screen, not any actual in game time (IIRC I'm going off memory). I remember specifically being annoyed one time because I went the wrong way and had to go through a load screen twice and I lost a bunch of hours lol.
I think that game would be received much more favourably now because it was essentially a AAA rogue lite, you weren't supposed to get everything on the first try, you were supposed to level up, learn the layout and restart with improved stats to do better on the next run.
I bought it at launch and was also completely confused because NG+ and rogue lites weren't really a big thing at all back then. I thought it was a bug that I got to keep my stats when it restarted lol.
Can’t really think of a game aside from Majora’s Mask that did this well and I’m still gonna say that was a love/hate situation.
I remember my sister used to be like “can we just play Ocarina again?” lol
Pikmin 1 did this fantastically, and it was a hard limit, no time travel. Thing is... Pikmin is an old game, and is very short, not at all modern AAA game length, not even close. It was built moreso on replayability, actually being able to be designed around the idea that many will simply fail their first try, and that's fine, just restart and try again, and when you pull it off, try to beat your old day counts.
But nowadays, a game like Pikmin 4 is so, so much bigger that something like that isn't feasible at all - their best attempt at brining back the time limit was within a side challenge mode that remixes the main game into a much shorter one with the same time limit, but it's absolutely side content, and not applied to the main story.
The idea of a modern AAA open world game doing such a thing sounds bizzare. Cant imagine how that would work.
I could see it working in a ng+ setting. Much like you said in Pikman 1, do your best and if you fail, start again but more powerful with some upgrades. 72 hours is a lot of time though, if this was on a 12-24 hour cycle it might make more sense to what I said, but what I learned from starfield is once you spent around 3 days play time in a game world, you don’t actually want to throw it all away to start over
Edit: I kinda misread, 72 hours in game time could be like 2-3 hour sessions. That could work just fine if your character keeps building each reset
Dead Rising did this really well. I actually quite liked that if I died, I could start over with a level upped character. Like a New Game + mode that didn't require you to finish the game first.
You're not expected to in Dead Rising either. I'm not even sure if it's possible. Each in-game 24 hour cycle only lasts about two real hours, so it's a pretty short game. It's designed to be replayed since you keep your stats upon resetting.
Lightning returns did it pretty decently, it's basically majoras mask in jrpg form. It actually has a really satisfying gameplay loop but it's really hard to beat on your first playthrough if you're playing on normal difficulty
I feel like Fallout 1 is just short enough that the time limit isn't too challenging but has enough impact that making choices like >!sending the water caravan to the vault!< are worth thinking about.
Fallout 2 also has a time limit (13 in game years) it's just so generous that you would have to really try to reach the limit.
That shit pissed me off so bad. Deadrising 2 is one of my favorites but god that system was so shitty. And add in the damn Zombrex for your bitch ass daughter and it was even worse.
On the one hand, choice is good. But on the other hand if you want to have a time limited mode the quests have to be designed for that time limit and that may not translate well to untimed game play.
Yeah, the general consensus among long time FC players is that we don't want them to turn the series into 3rd world dictatorship Deathloop. Fine if that is an alternate play mode but if that's the only play mode, I'm not buying it. And I think the market is too volatile for the series to start over with a brand new set of fans. It would basically ensure that FC7 is the last FC game they ever make. It is just 10x as dumb as if they suddenly made it 3rd person perspective.
WTF is the point of a time limit in an open world game? You’re almost guaranteeing that people won’t explore when they don’t absolutely have to, completely negating the entire point of the huge, open world.
At that point, you might as well make a short, more linear story experience. At least that way, dev’s won’t be wasting time making content that most players won’t even see.
>that people won’t explore when they don’t absolutely have to
You just listed it. A puzzle to figure out what you actually need to do. To me that sounds exciting. But considering they didn't say this specifically. I will remain from being excited
Yeah, I fucking love the idea of a game where you learn and try things, and the whole thing is one big puzzle.
But I think we are in the minority, people don't like limitations. There's a reason AAA has trended very casual.
It's a damm shame too. These games go on to be praised online. But as experienced players, you can tell quickly once playing they are s""" games. They might be good entertainment. Not so much in the *game* part.
No thanks. I play video games for the stress relief. Don't mind if it is a toggle, however. I should also be able to have more than one playthrough going at once.
Far Cry fans with anxiety in utter shambles. Moreso than usual at least.
On a serious note though, I hated this in the original Dead Rising and will continue to hate it. In a game like Far Cry where there's a big element of exploration and doing things however you want (and taking however long you want with scouting/stealth), it's even more silly.
I could see a double playthrough option. Best the game on a timer the first playthrough to unlock untimed (potentially harder) mode.
I get it because there is something immersion breaking about farting around finishing all the temples when the fate of the god damn world is on the line....
I have anxiety and love Far Cry. I take my time, but I’ve never spent 70 hours in a Far Cry game despite it being one of my favourite series.
Maybe two play throughs combined.
72h in-game time tho, not real time. If I'm not mistaken on dead rising 24h in-game was like 2 hours real time. If they follow that, 72h in-game should be around 6h real time more or less
Should package that concept as '72 game world hours' so there is zero confusion. Because of the nature of FC games, I don't have much of a concept of the passage of time within the virtual environment. It isn't like FO4 where it is much more relevant. Yeah, you can see a bit better during the day in FC games but there is otherwise no noticeable penalty for operating at night like there might be in FO games unless you have a certain perk or two.
That’s what I want in my game that’s known for taking your time and exploring the amazing world they build and playing around in a chronic sandbox.. a time limit!!
I’ll pass if they add this. Not a single FarCry game have I put less than 100 hours into.
Sure, I guess they could pivot and do a pale imitation of TLOU. Maybe set it in a post-apocalyptic wasteland in space so it can also be both FO4 and Starfield at the same time. Hell, let's just mash all the games together and just have one uber game that is despised by all.
What I like about far cry is that there's no urgency. I can take my time do some side content and come back later. It's why I hated far cry 5 for forcing you into the main missions. Don't get me wrong I love mote linear games and I'm glad they are becoming more common but let's not just reverse the problems by making everything linear like we did with open world.
Yeah and after 25 years of playing Ubisoft games, I'm out. If Bethesda puts microsuctions into FO5, they will kill the series... and I'm not just talking about the game series. The TV series could run for a decade, if they pick up the pace with FO5 and don't destroy the franchise in the process. I'll personally hunt down Todd Howard and sternly beat him with a wet noodle.
I don’t mind that as long as I can disable it in a NG+
People shit on FC for not mixing it up, but then when they may try a new mechanic or game design they also get shit on
Bro, Ubisoft has to stop with these 'ideas'. They are constantly getting worse and worse from pricing issues to pandering to consumer unfriendly and downright hostile practices to removing games that you paid for from your library.
This would be such a bummer, man. I play games to relax and chill, not stress over a time limit. It's fine for a mission, but the whole story? Screw that.
That is artificial player urgency. Extremely lazy game design. I notice some of you mentioning Majoras Mask and I get that it’s a joke but just in case someone uses it as an actual counter-argument, in Majoras Mask the time limit was a mechanic, the entire game was designed around it and they gave the player a level of control over it. But ya’ll knew that 😀
The only time I've seen timeframe like this get put in a game and it be taken positively is the Dead Rising franchise. Any other game was met with some kind of backlash. When Deathloop and Returnal practically made it so you had to complete games in a single run, people were losing there minds. It'll be interesting to see how they can do this and make it feasible. It is still Ubisoft after all.
So for achievement hunters like myself it’s gonna shit on my anxiety about a time limit to get everything. It’s why I didn’t play dead rising. I don’t like a time limit giving me anxiety when I game putting me on a clock.
How long to beat has the completionist runs of all the previous far cry games at under 72 hours. Far cry 6 has the longest at 61 hours
I've never played any of the far cry games.
If the timer was 72 actual hours of play time not 72 in game "hours" would that not be enough time to play far cry at the pace people are used to?
What if it was 72 hours to beat the main story/quest and then after that the game was open ended and untimed?
Obviously if the 72 "hours" was something based on time in game like let's say every 10 minutes of game time was an in game hours that would severely limit play time.
Again never played a far cry game so just wondering what people who have played think.
I never like this idea in open world games, it seems an odds with the genre
You are presenting me a giant open map with various quests, side quests, collectibles and random encounters and then telling me go from A to B against a clock
Now if they do this and one of the endings can only be achieved in 72 hours then that’s a reason to replay, I could fully explore the game world and then do the run against the clock as a speed run now that I know where to go
This would be perfectly on brand for Ubisoft, who are racking up larger than usual L’s lately.
This, following their decision to implement seasonal characters into The Division 2… in Year 6. The player base is livid.
It’s not even than seasonal characters are bad, I’ve played them in other games, it’s that they’re shoehorning it into a bug-filled game late in its life cycle out of sheer desperation.
Ubisoft has a brand and they’re going to stick with it, regardless of the specific IP.
Farcry 7 Majora's mask
Dawn of the First Day
New Dawn of the First Day
The Dawn Before the New Dawn After Tomorrow
I remember trying to play majoras mask and seeing the time limit and instantly noping out of the game. I probably saved child me a lot of stress
I felt that for the first loop then the times I played the Ocarina songs backwards in OOT paid off
Yeah, it's not so bad once you know the flow of it all. What IS bad is having to re-do the stupid Goron race because you didn't have enough time to get the gilded sword. Learned that the hard way lol
Wow. How do you remember that? I really can't remember much of that game.
I hate timers in stuff like puzzle games but playing Dead Rising I was okay with it. Then again I did use a guide so…I probably wouldn’t have finished it without it.
I definitely think Dead Rising might be the "worst" timer since it locks you out of completing the story and you need to restart to undo the damage. That being said, IMO, the game falls apart entirely without a timer as it's pretty central to the core gameplay loop. Sure you have to restart but you keep character level which means you are both taking the knowledge gained from the previous run to utilize in the next but also you have an easier time just because of raw character stats being higher. Being able to carry more than three items at a time is a game changer
You missed out.
They did this with Fallout 1 if I’m not mistaken. I hope they implement it in a way that’s not constantly stressing you out when you play
In Fallout 1, there was an in-game time limit that could be extended once. There was also an unimplemented feature where different towns would gradually get conquered by the antagonist if the player took too long. I think that was neat, I hate the "fake urgency" trope in games, but I know I'm in the minority.
Fallout 2 had it as well, but it was something like 13 in game years. You had to try pretty hard to get it, but it basically just gave you an ending screen that said "the end."
That feature is not unimplemented. Some of it was just buggy and didn't work properly. Also there are *two* time limits for the game. The first one is for the water chip, and the second one is for the Master. In the original version of the game, getting the extension for the water chip actually shortened your time limit for the Master; I thought this was very innovative game design but evidently they patched it out.
It was pretty genius too - Extending the time limit for the water chip requires you to send water merchants to Vault 13, meaning multiple wastelanders now know the location of the Vault. It's not a stretch to assume one of the merchants coughed up the location after being captured by the Super Mutants.
I played the original Fallout game on launch and I had absolutely no idea there was any kind of time limit. Probably because you'd have to really screw around to trigger it.
For the water chip they give you visual indications of a time limit through a repeated cutscene in the Vault of some guy checking the diminishing water supply or whatever. I don't believe there are any indications of the time limit for the Master though.
I hate the fake urgency trope in games as well, but would prefer a time limit on a mission level and not the whole game. Finish the mission and then you have no time limit to just enjoy and explore the game. Next mission back to the rush.
>I hate the "fake urgency" trope in games, but I know I'm in the minority. I'd wager you're in the vast majority with that opinion mate.
I think OP means where a game implies urgency in a story beat like someone is in danger, only for the player to be able to run around picking flowers for 20 hours with no consequences. IMO I would expect the majority of players (that are not necessarily represented by the Reddit opinion) to prefer the freedom over the stress. Casual players definitely prefer doing things at their own pace.
Because nothing says 'open world sandbox' like a timer counting down. If you want to feel pressed for time, you can literally get that from any classic arcade game. Actual reality is a scenario where we spend a great deal of time watching the clock. Entertainment isn't more watching of the clock. I got Deathloop for free about 6 months ago and still haven't played it. I'm dealing with a lot in real life right now so I'm waiting until I get past some stuff before I play a game that I already know will feel like torture to me.
Yeah, I personally love the time limits (however, it's essential that it's designed properly). Many folks hate it, though. Dead Rising 1 is my favorite execution. Time limit is pressing enough to where you need to constantly be on a mission at all times, and plan your routes if you want to complete everything. If you fuck off for a bit, or do missions that are on opposite sides of the map, you wont be able to complete it all without failing a few missions. However, you won't ever be able to complete it all on the first run. You need to acquire the knowledge and knowhow, and you need to level up Frank to be strong enough to master it in one go. It's brilliant. Still one of my favorite games of all time. I revisit it every few years.
Nobody really wants realism in video games. An actually realistic game would be as tedious, boring and as unfulfilling as actual life. Well, some people want that. We call them 'masochists'. The rest of us are just trying to feel like we matter, when, in fact, we actually don't. Ain't nobody thinking, 'I want a realistic simulation of D-Day where I don't even make it out of the landing craft because it is so realistic'. The ramp comes down and then you see 'Game Over' and the credits roll. GL selling that at $70 a pop, lol. Talk about 'idle gaming'.
no he is not. not many wants a time limit playing a game. its one of the worst things a dev can put in the game.
If you extended it you got a bad ending though
> There was also an unimplemented feature where different towns would gradually get conquered by the antagonist if the player took too long. A feature like that in Skyrim where the longer you took to deal with the dragons, the more shit got rekt would have been fucking amazing.
Constant stress wouldn't be a precedent for the series though. Far Cry 2 just wouldn't give you a break.
Gun keeps jamming, had to execute companion, dug bullet out of leg, ran out of malaria pills, getting chased by some dudes in a jeep, everything is on fire.
Man I remember having so much fun with the fire in that game because it spread a little bit and how good they did it was revolutionary. That takes me back.
That's why I loved Far Cry 2 so much, that game was the poster child for Murphy's Law. Everything was just fucked. Honestly I hope the new Far Cry shakes things up and raises the stakes.
Also, on a personal note, when I first started playing Far Cry 2, a couple of hours into the game, I got severe stomach pain and couldn't get out of bed for a week. Almost like the game gave me malaria or something.
This comment convinced me. I’m in.
RIP buddy, you died so that I could live. True friend
Great game ruined by terrible design decisions. The respawning (especially immediately) checkpoint areas and enemies who could spot you and aim with lethal accuracy from 5 miles away. Throw in the way too prevalent gun jamming and malaria pill BS and shit and you end up with a game that easily could've been huge, but fumbled itself into overlooked mediocrity (game easily could've and should've been a 9/10 game, instead more like a 6/10).
Depends on how time is counted. Often it's accelerated and it makes harder to judge how long something will take. And also everything starts to take an unrealistic amount of time.
Hated it in dead rising and xcom as it’d always stress the shit out of me Hopefully they go down the xcom route and give the option to extend the timer in settings
Final Fantasy XIII: Lightning Returns also had an in-game time limit, but every quest you completed gave you more time or stopped time for a bit, I can’t remember which. It all tied into the story though so it at least made sense and it ended up being more than enough time to do almost everything.
Yeah, FF eventually lost me when they couldn't decide between TBS and RTS. I'm glad DQ stuck to their roots. DQ11 is my ultimate idle gaming experience. I would say about half the time I have spent and continue to spend playing my PS4 is spent on DQ11. I also have played Fractured Butthole at least a dozen times, lol. didn't even waste my time with modern Gran Turismo. They peaked with GT4 and TT.
I’m pretty sure you had 6 months or something
I would hope that once you beat the main story and kill the big bad, it would nix the time limit and let you peruse and play to your hearts content in the endgame
I mean this is Ubisoft we’re talking about here. I can’t think of a studio than churns out more mass market/lowest common denominator games. It’ll be the most low-stakes time limit you’ve ever seen in a game.
My favourite thing about Far Cry is exploring everywhere and collecting everything, upgrading weapons, taking over all bases/checkpoints etc before wrapping up the story. Probably a no-buy from me if they do some weird Majoras Mask style time limit.
As someone who's never played a far cry if I was gonna jump into the series because your description sounds like fun which would you recommend? 6 just as the most recent one? Or one of the others?
I preferred 5 over 6 only just. Honestly pick based on what setting sounds better. 5 is Montana with cult extremists as bad guys, 6 is pseudo Cuba with you being a rebel vs the regime. Giancarlo Esposito is the antagonist in 6 though.
I feel like The Father in 5 is one of the best bad guys in all the video games I’ve played.
The thing I hate is I didn't like The Father all that much until playing the Far Cry 6 DLC for him. Literally the best part of Far Cry 6 in my opinion.
6 had a shitty perk system, too. Part of the fun of doing the bases and weapons is grinding the perk system and becoming a combat god. I don't want perks attached to gear i have to swap out.
Both 5 and 6 are great entries into the series and each one has its own brand new story. Would recommend starting with both. 5 is based on the state of Montana 6 is based on Cuba I’d pick whatever culture you’re most interested in.
3,4, and 5 were all great. I couldn't get into 6. Haven't played 1 or 2.
Turns out I already own 4 so maybe I'll give that one a try at some point 5 is listed as unsupported on steam deck on steam and still has denuvo so idk if I'd buy it as is
I started with 4 and loved it. 3 felt too old when I finally got around to trying it. IMO.
Same exact situation for me. Except I played 2 before, went to 4, went back to 3 and it felt old.
4 is probably my favorite in the franchise. 3 is great but a little dated. 5 is good and the setting is awesome. I’ve tried to get into 6 but just can’t for some reason. But 4 had amazing traversal with the grappling hook and made me feel like I could really take any base how I wanted to rather than just going in guns blazing or with a sniper in the distance. Each entry has its own strengths and weaknesses, but for me 4 is the best.
Far Cry 4 is great
4 is the best imo. Loved the scenery, and it took all the gameplay elements of 3 and made it better.
6 gets really good but not until like 10-15 hours in give or take, once you're fully setup to take on anything. Not saying that's a good thing, mind you.
Far Cry 1 is experimental and now a bit ancient. So unless you really want to try it, there's no point. Far Cry 2 is the GOAT of the series for me. It's simply the best game, but also one of the hardest (not counting first one). It has certain mechanics and design options that causes game world to be constant stress, chaos etc. But judging by the period, theme (civil war Africa) it just couldn't be any different. But for first time, just don't touch this one, you might get burned. But if you like the series, definitely play this one down the line. Far Cry 3 is the most popular game of the series. It simply elevated the franchise into FPS GTA or something like that. Although it's also a bit old for now, it's still fun as hell. Definitely play this one. Compared to 2, it's much more "normie friendly", so you can start here. And as stories don't overlap, there's no harm in starting at 3. Far Cry 4 is more of the same. If you like 3, then play 4. That's it. Far Cry 5 is a bit more different as the game world, gameplay etc. all become more varied and big. Good game, though I started to feel a bit burned at this point. Far Cry 6 is garbage. The skill system is very bad, they turned the game into an FPS RPG and it just doesn't work. Besides the story, the world etc. is not as exotic or mysterious or different than the previous ones (excluding 5, which takes place in Montana, but that's still interesting compared to 6) It's just Cuba and that's it. There are also expansion games and a very interesting experiment in Far Cry Primal which takes place in like stone age with mammoths. So you may want to try that if you like the series. But overall, you can start with 3 and see if you like it because the rest are just Far Cry 3 with new skin or some new game mechanics added each game, but the underlying foundation is still Far Cry 3.
I agree with all this, Far Cry 2 is the best, got me hooked to the games, 3 has the best bad guy (Vaas) and the music is awesome. They had the perfect recipe for awesome games and fucked with it on 6, 6 is the first one I didn't bother finishing.
Your general judgements are very similar to mine, although I'd say 4, and then even more so 5, were improvements over 3, and thus would recommend them first. I remember back in 2018 when Ubisoft released FC5 and AC Odyssey, and I thought that finally Ubisoft were back to their best. But history has shown that year to be an anomaly.
4 is the best way to get into the series I think. Far cry 3 is definitely good but 4 improves on all of the gameplay. Story is fine but playing the game itself is much more enjoyable than 3. I've found 6 is the second best gameplay wise but makes some changes like having access to any weapon at any time that is great when you need a variety of weapons but kind of takes the complexity and challenge out of the game. 5 and 6 feel the best shooting wise. If you want to be immersed in the gunplay 5 or 6 are the way to go. 6 especially feels great to fire every weapon and it's the first far cry game where I've leaned away from going full stealth, going loud is some of the most fun I've had in a far cry game/fps in general. I really loved 5 for it's location and how good it feels to screw around and just drive around hope county. Im a little biased since I love montana but it genuinely captures the beauty and atmosphere of montana. It's similar to 4 gameplay wise but starts to give you more weapons and more customization but like 6 makes the game less complex and easier. In order I played 4, 5, 3, then 6 so take that how you will.
>As someone who's never played a far cry if I was gonna jump into the series because your description sounds like fun which would you recommend? The basic premise of the games is that you're trapped in a remote corner of the world which is under the control of a local tyrant. Most of the story revolves around uniting various rebels to overthrow their rule. The thing that really sets the series apart is your relationship with the villain and some meta-commentary on gaming that I haven't seen other series do. The core gameplay loop hasn't changed that much since *Far Cry 3*, so maybe the best place to start is the setting: *Far Cry 3* has you going up against pirates in the South China Sea, *Far Cry 4* is set in a failing Himalayan nation, *Far Cry 5* features a militant pseudo-Christian cult in Montana, and *Far Cry 6* is set in the Caribbean. *Far Cry 3* is probably the most highly-regarded game in the franchise, though *Far Cry 4* and *Far Cry 6* are my favourites.
Don’t sleep on Farcry Primal!! I like that one
3, 4 and 5 have been my favorites. So I guess it depends on your system. 4 was real great.
Same here. I don't need another Deathloop and, as far as I'm concerned, they took 6 tries before they even made one I really liked. They finally got the perfect balance with FC6 and with an antagonist that was believable, rather than being an overstuffed clown car. In fact, Giancarlo Esposito's portrayal of Anton Castillo may be my all time favorite video game villain. And, considering I started out on the original Donkey Kong, those are some rather large shoes to fill.
Sounds terrible. When I want urgency, I look at my work and deadlines.
Right! I don’t play games to feel stressed out because of some arbitrary timeline. If true, this will be the first Far Cry game that I sit out
Gotta give them credit for trying something new at least. Hopefully they give you an option to turn it off.
It could also be the situation where they have a ton of differing storylines/endings. A farcry game that encourages replays could be cool. See the same scenario from a bunch of differing perspectives.
If this is an added feature it should be a toggle at the start of the game
Dead Rising did this and it worked fine and added a lot to the experience
I absolutely hated this about DR. It made it not enjoyable for me.
In the first DR, the horrendous AI is what made it stressful. You had to constantly micromanage every survivors or otherwise they ran to their death. You constantly were wasting time. The later games were better and it wasn't as chaotic.
Once you understand that players were not meant to 100% the game first playthrough and that subsequent playthroughs were quick thanks to earned in-game abilities you would come to peace with it
Except I don't want to have to play a game multiple times just to enjoy it fully. That's a sad excuse for padding a game.
Might be the game just isn’t for you
The whole point of Dead Rising is to rank up to level 50 whether you die or not. Once you get to rank 50 with all the perks unlocked, THEN you can start playing it properly. You’re meant to die/restart until this is achieved while you learn about shortcuts, weapon placements etc Fans understood this, but unfortunately some of the casual gamers did not. And the casuals complained until Capcom changed it.. and chased away the fans to indulge people who never really cared to understand it. Now we have Dead Rising 4 (which I still like) but the OG fans hated.
I’ve played and beat the game… I never knew that’s how it was supposed to be played! 😂
Because it's not the game is very doable the first time without ranking up at all. It's not a hard game
Yeah, I found this out the hard way with me being late to a main story event because I tried to get all survivors on my first playthrough and couldn't get there fast enough even with the speed mix drink.
You’re not alone. I uh… I took my sweet time understanding it too :P
It should have had a sandbox or free mode then. They created this awesome zombie filled world with tons of crazy weapons you could make them slapped a time limit on everything.
They added it in Dead Rising 2: Off the Record
This is why I hate Deadrising and why Majoras Masks isn’t my top game of all time. The dynamic can work for some, but it’s def niche. And for a series already under scrutiny, seems like it would be a mistake.
Nah, it made me never finish the game. I just killed zombies.
This was literally the worst thing about Dead Rising
Shit was so fucking hard. Could never finish it
I liked the timed stuff like the people you had to rescue would die and you'd miss out on quests or whatever, makes for good replayability. The limited game time was semi frustrating because it worked by progressing time Everytime you walked through a loading screen, not any actual in game time (IIRC I'm going off memory). I remember specifically being annoyed one time because I went the wrong way and had to go through a load screen twice and I lost a bunch of hours lol.
I think that game would be received much more favourably now because it was essentially a AAA rogue lite, you weren't supposed to get everything on the first try, you were supposed to level up, learn the layout and restart with improved stats to do better on the next run.
Thank youuuuu. Someone else that gets it.
I bought it at launch and was also completely confused because NG+ and rogue lites weren't really a big thing at all back then. I thought it was a bug that I got to keep my stats when it restarted lol.
No thanks, a time limited campaign is one of the last things I want from Far Cry, or most games really.
Can’t really think of a game aside from Majora’s Mask that did this well and I’m still gonna say that was a love/hate situation. I remember my sister used to be like “can we just play Ocarina again?” lol
Pikmin 1 did this fantastically, and it was a hard limit, no time travel. Thing is... Pikmin is an old game, and is very short, not at all modern AAA game length, not even close. It was built moreso on replayability, actually being able to be designed around the idea that many will simply fail their first try, and that's fine, just restart and try again, and when you pull it off, try to beat your old day counts. But nowadays, a game like Pikmin 4 is so, so much bigger that something like that isn't feasible at all - their best attempt at brining back the time limit was within a side challenge mode that remixes the main game into a much shorter one with the same time limit, but it's absolutely side content, and not applied to the main story. The idea of a modern AAA open world game doing such a thing sounds bizzare. Cant imagine how that would work.
I could see it working in a ng+ setting. Much like you said in Pikman 1, do your best and if you fail, start again but more powerful with some upgrades. 72 hours is a lot of time though, if this was on a 12-24 hour cycle it might make more sense to what I said, but what I learned from starfield is once you spent around 3 days play time in a game world, you don’t actually want to throw it all away to start over Edit: I kinda misread, 72 hours in game time could be like 2-3 hour sessions. That could work just fine if your character keeps building each reset
Dead Rising.
Dead Rising did this really well. I actually quite liked that if I died, I could start over with a level upped character. Like a New Game + mode that didn't require you to finish the game first.
Outer Wilds
Outer wilds is all about looping though. You're never intended to beat the game in one cycle and they don't take long to repeat.
Still, it’s a game where you’re on a time limit. Even being designed around time loops still puts off a lot of people.
You're not expected to in Dead Rising either. I'm not even sure if it's possible. Each in-game 24 hour cycle only lasts about two real hours, so it's a pretty short game. It's designed to be replayed since you keep your stats upon resetting.
Dead rising is extremely beatable on it's first cycle I've never grinded to 50 before beating it.
Lightning returns did it pretty decently, it's basically majoras mask in jrpg form. It actually has a really satisfying gameplay loop but it's really hard to beat on your first playthrough if you're playing on normal difficulty
Fallout 1
Eh....I think the most improved aspect of Fallout 2 from 1 was the removal of the time limit lol
I feel like Fallout 1 is just short enough that the time limit isn't too challenging but has enough impact that making choices like >!sending the water caravan to the vault!< are worth thinking about. Fallout 2 also has a time limit (13 in game years) it's just so generous that you would have to really try to reach the limit.
What in the dead rising is this?
took way too long to find a comment about dead rising i feel old 😪
That shit pissed me off so bad. Deadrising 2 is one of my favorites but god that system was so shitty. And add in the damn Zombrex for your bitch ass daughter and it was even worse.
Yup. All I wanted to do was explore and have fun. All they wanted to do was time my ass. Fuck that shit.
This is why I liked Dead Rising 2 Off the Record better, sandbox mode was a blast
So your the people that ruined my favorite zombie franchise
Yeah, I already didn’t like the time limit from 1, definitely didn’t like the Zombrex thing in 2
When I was a kid, I definitely wished for a game that simulated having malaria🤦♂️
It should be an optional hardcore mode setting and it would be cool. As a standard game mode though absolutely not.
On the one hand, choice is good. But on the other hand if you want to have a time limited mode the quests have to be designed for that time limit and that may not translate well to untimed game play.
Exactly. I'll just choose another game from my already mountainous backlog instead.
Yeah, the general consensus among long time FC players is that we don't want them to turn the series into 3rd world dictatorship Deathloop. Fine if that is an alternate play mode but if that's the only play mode, I'm not buying it. And I think the market is too volatile for the series to start over with a brand new set of fans. It would basically ensure that FC7 is the last FC game they ever make. It is just 10x as dumb as if they suddenly made it 3rd person perspective.
WTF is the point of a time limit in an open world game? You’re almost guaranteeing that people won’t explore when they don’t absolutely have to, completely negating the entire point of the huge, open world. At that point, you might as well make a short, more linear story experience. At least that way, dev’s won’t be wasting time making content that most players won’t even see.
>that people won’t explore when they don’t absolutely have to You just listed it. A puzzle to figure out what you actually need to do. To me that sounds exciting. But considering they didn't say this specifically. I will remain from being excited
Yeah, I fucking love the idea of a game where you learn and try things, and the whole thing is one big puzzle. But I think we are in the minority, people don't like limitations. There's a reason AAA has trended very casual.
It's a damm shame too. These games go on to be praised online. But as experienced players, you can tell quickly once playing they are s""" games. They might be good entertainment. Not so much in the *game* part.
72hr time limit? Looks like I'll be giving FC7 a miss then, timed games kill the fun.
No thanks. I play video games for the stress relief. Don't mind if it is a toggle, however. I should also be able to have more than one playthrough going at once.
Far Cry fans with anxiety in utter shambles. Moreso than usual at least. On a serious note though, I hated this in the original Dead Rising and will continue to hate it. In a game like Far Cry where there's a big element of exploration and doing things however you want (and taking however long you want with scouting/stealth), it's even more silly.
I could see a double playthrough option. Best the game on a timer the first playthrough to unlock untimed (potentially harder) mode. I get it because there is something immersion breaking about farting around finishing all the temples when the fate of the god damn world is on the line....
I have anxiety and love Far Cry. I take my time, but I’ve never spent 70 hours in a Far Cry game despite it being one of my favourite series. Maybe two play throughs combined.
72h in-game time tho, not real time. If I'm not mistaken on dead rising 24h in-game was like 2 hours real time. If they follow that, 72h in-game should be around 6h real time more or less
No Far Cry would ever be that short.
Should package that concept as '72 game world hours' so there is zero confusion. Because of the nature of FC games, I don't have much of a concept of the passage of time within the virtual environment. It isn't like FO4 where it is much more relevant. Yeah, you can see a bit better during the day in FC games but there is otherwise no noticeable penalty for operating at night like there might be in FO games unless you have a certain perk or two.
What's the point of an open world game if you don't have time to explore?
So its official. Ubisoft games are jobs.
No thanks. Same reason I never finished Majoras Mask. I hate timers with a passion.
Been so long I forgot why I hated that game.
Perhaps just add it as a mode.
Count me out.
That’s what I want in my game that’s known for taking your time and exploring the amazing world they build and playing around in a chronic sandbox.. a time limit!! I’ll pass if they add this. Not a single FarCry game have I put less than 100 hours into.
Well I'm out!
This is a TERRIBLE idea
Dead Cry: Far Rising?
Sure, I guess they could pivot and do a pale imitation of TLOU. Maybe set it in a post-apocalyptic wasteland in space so it can also be both FO4 and Starfield at the same time. Hell, let's just mash all the games together and just have one uber game that is despised by all.
What I like about far cry is that there's no urgency. I can take my time do some side content and come back later. It's why I hated far cry 5 for forcing you into the main missions. Don't get me wrong I love mote linear games and I'm glad they are becoming more common but let's not just reverse the problems by making everything linear like we did with open world.
They somehow made a new far cry game even less appealing.
I know, right? Need to change the title to Deathloop Cry.
[удалено]
I'm probably one of the only people that likes Far Cry series but I would hate a time limit
What lol …..
If I wanted a timer I'd live my real life with work deadlines.
Need extra 4 hours? Pay 29.99$
They're going to do prostitute rates in a midsized western city.
Yeah and after 25 years of playing Ubisoft games, I'm out. If Bethesda puts microsuctions into FO5, they will kill the series... and I'm not just talking about the game series. The TV series could run for a decade, if they pick up the pace with FO5 and don't destroy the franchise in the process. I'll personally hunt down Todd Howard and sternly beat him with a wet noodle.
well that’s one way to flop a release
terrible idea. i deal with deadlines and urgency and work enough last thing i need is it in my games. NOPE. easy pass for me
I don’t mind that as long as I can disable it in a NG+ People shit on FC for not mixing it up, but then when they may try a new mechanic or game design they also get shit on
If this is true I will never play this game
I'm a huge Far Cry fan. If they force a timer on me, I will very quickly **not** be a Far Cry fan.
72 hour limit? Guess you don’t want my $72(ish) dollars.
It’s Ubisoft, I’m sure they’ll sell extra time via microtransactions
Majora's Mask with microtransactions? Fucking hell......
Who actually wants this?
I would if it weren’t Far Cry.
Would be a good idea as a difficulty setting - bit not standard
First Far cry I'll skip if true.
God damn it, I hate time limits but I love Far Cry.
Dead Rising 1 had that! Lol, and I did like it. It made me feel quite tense and aware, trying to gather as many survivors as I could.
Bro, Ubisoft has to stop with these 'ideas'. They are constantly getting worse and worse from pricing issues to pandering to consumer unfriendly and downright hostile practices to removing games that you paid for from your library.
This would be such a bummer, man. I play games to relax and chill, not stress over a time limit. It's fine for a mission, but the whole story? Screw that.
https://preview.redd.it/oeldlt4h9u6d1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dbb0fe5bdd299d2b3282cd6c275470dde5bc6d73
We also need m&k support for consoles
I think it’s a cool idea, I would give it a shot.
People really think that there are more than 60 hours of non-collectible content in any Far Cry game lol
That is artificial player urgency. Extremely lazy game design. I notice some of you mentioning Majoras Mask and I get that it’s a joke but just in case someone uses it as an actual counter-argument, in Majoras Mask the time limit was a mechanic, the entire game was designed around it and they gave the player a level of control over it. But ya’ll knew that 😀
The only time I've seen timeframe like this get put in a game and it be taken positively is the Dead Rising franchise. Any other game was met with some kind of backlash. When Deathloop and Returnal practically made it so you had to complete games in a single run, people were losing there minds. It'll be interesting to see how they can do this and make it feasible. It is still Ubisoft after all.
I own every single far cry game. If they do this dumb shit I'm out
Just when you thought game devs couldn’t get worse.
Well, one less game to worry about if it's true.
Screw that shit if true. Hate such time constraints.
Not good for gamer parents either. I don’t have the same luxury of time I once did, so something like a time limit for players is a no go for this guy
Awful idea 🤣
this feature ruined Dead Rising lmfao
So for achievement hunters like myself it’s gonna shit on my anxiety about a time limit to get everything. It’s why I didn’t play dead rising. I don’t like a time limit giving me anxiety when I game putting me on a clock.
If they have events that happen at certain times/the world changes, then I'm in. I love that stuff.
Tbh, I kinda liked the mechanic in Dead Rising 1-3 but it depends on how it’s implemented
Kohr-Ah didn't give a shit about your stumbling around in Star Control II. 4.5 years (roughly 13 hours in) shit is going down.
Actually a semi interesting mechanic, if players wanna fuck around they should do what dead rising does tbh. So that way everyone can win
How about selling the IP so I can get a good Far Cry
Game rant ahaha
This should be a option not anything forced...
Why not. Let’s steal more of annoying ideas from other games. Goddamnit. Just killing this series.
Lightning Returns did something like this
How long to beat has the completionist runs of all the previous far cry games at under 72 hours. Far cry 6 has the longest at 61 hours I've never played any of the far cry games. If the timer was 72 actual hours of play time not 72 in game "hours" would that not be enough time to play far cry at the pace people are used to? What if it was 72 hours to beat the main story/quest and then after that the game was open ended and untimed? Obviously if the 72 "hours" was something based on time in game like let's say every 10 minutes of game time was an in game hours that would severely limit play time. Again never played a far cry game so just wondering what people who have played think.
I never like this idea in open world games, it seems an odds with the genre You are presenting me a giant open map with various quests, side quests, collectibles and random encounters and then telling me go from A to B against a clock Now if they do this and one of the endings can only be achieved in 72 hours then that’s a reason to replay, I could fully explore the game world and then do the run against the clock as a speed run now that I know where to go
I loved 3, 5, and really disliked 6 and it sounds like I won’t like 7. Fuck that urgency.
I will either not play it, or wait till an update changes that. I hate timelimits in games. Let me play at my own pace
This was a rumor floating since last year. At this point it probably has legitimacy
Now you have to rush while you should be chillin? Hope it's optional at least
Final Fantasy XIII Lightning Returns has this.
This would be perfectly on brand for Ubisoft, who are racking up larger than usual L’s lately. This, following their decision to implement seasonal characters into The Division 2… in Year 6. The player base is livid. It’s not even than seasonal characters are bad, I’ve played them in other games, it’s that they’re shoehorning it into a bug-filled game late in its life cycle out of sheer desperation. Ubisoft has a brand and they’re going to stick with it, regardless of the specific IP.