Far Cry 6

You know, when he went "I'm El Presidente", my first reaction was "Oh, so we're getting a Far Cry set in Tropico now?"

The Assassins Creed also from Ubsoft is the only exemple I can remember of a video game franchise that sucessfull scape the Strictly Formula plotwise.

Just play Far Cry 3 and 4,and by 5 spoilers here looks like we still with the Main Villain is the lesser evil and our allies are worse than him.

Yeah, Far Cry is quite repetitive.

Isolated jungle area, filled with bases players can take to make it safe to wander around in, some weird ending.

Eh, some people believe you should always shake up the formula.

Other people believe that sequels exist so you can re-order a steak you've already enjoyed.

Formula nothing, but after 5's atrocious writing (especially the villains, among the worst in the industry IMO), I'm just done with it. Fun open world gameplay can easily be dragged down by an awful plot.

The best part of 5 was the DLC.

Far Cry 5 had the best plot of the series so far. And hands down the best original soundtrack in twenty years of my gaming experience.

What sticks in a lot of folks craws is that Joseph Seed was right about the Great Collapse, and more people could have been saved from it if the Deputy had done this one simple, easy thing.

Nothing.

Everyone you "saved" from the bunkers run by John and Jacob? Worm-food, if they were lucky.

I can, however, see why other people have a different idea, but that's up to them.

I liked Far Cry 5 in a lot of things, such as the gameplay, immersion, and world building. The villains were okay, but sometimes I wish I had the option to interrupt their dying speeches with a gunshot (even though they might end up having a point in the end). The ending though, that I hope they never pull off again with the main villain. If they wanted to do sequel bait, always do it with a minor villain that escapes, and don't render the player's efforts all for naught. There's a reason why I never bother to finish the game after doing so one time.

You see, that's what I liked, nay, loved about the ending, once the initial shock had worn off. It's Ubisoft's "General Konrad" moment. Their version of what happened to Captain Walker near the end of "Spec-Ops: The Line", another game where the player gets confronted with the fact that they are no hero, neither was the character that they were playing.

In both games, the best move for either lead character to do is to walk the fuck away, the only difference is in the timing. But neither is clever enough to do it on their own, and only one can - the Deputy - and that's only if the player is clever enough to realise that they are in way past the crown of their hat in hostile territory with dozens of guys and gals with automatic weapons and no compunction at all in using them.

I don't regret wiping out all of the Seeds, over the course of 5 and New Dawn. I'd do it again. But it isn't necessary, apart from Joseph.

Odd fact, in real life Appalachia, the "don't arrest Joseph Seed" ending is pretty much how we react to all the various militias as well as militia cults in my area. They pretty much are left alone to stockpile guns, do drugs, and enact their anti-government fantasies because no one wants to end up with a massive armed shootout that will get kids killed.

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Jul 17th 2020 at 4:14:15 AM

Well that solves nothing.

Given these are the same groups assaulting, sorry, "protesting" state capitals, you are correct.

It is, however, Truth in Television.

I wonder if I should add that to the Far Cry 5 page.

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Jul 17th 2020 at 4:14:53 AM

x6

I typed out a better response but then TV Tropes dropped off the face of the earth and the post was lost so whatever.

No, that's exactly why I fucking hated that ending. It's so awful. No, you have a psychopathic televangelist right wing prepper jackass murdering his way through hundreds and you VIDICATE his awful behavior? No. Fuck that ending. Fuck that ending so much. There is no logic in him being right. At all. Period. The game has to pull a nuke out of it's ass to (MAYBE) make him right about one and only one thing and that justifies nothing he did. And if a nuke is landing, you're damn straight that he's the first person I'm leaving in the blast radius if we're running to our cars. But can't do that for... reasons? Dumbass game.

I don't give two fucks if he's some how correct in his crazed drug addled prophesy nonsense. None of that somehow justifies or excuses his murder of hundreds, torture of those he didn't murder, killing and drugging dozens of women to be some hallucinogenic mind control siren, and on top of that ending on him all but saying that you're about to be his new rape and torture victim until either of you die. There are so many painfully easy refutations of his bullshit. "I was right." No, you fucking weren't and shut the hell up, Seed.

I don't mind villains having a point. Hell, I've enjoyed stories where the villain was actually right. THIS is not that. And I cannot stress how absolutely dangerous it is to look at the political nonsense going on in America right now and go "You know who the REAL underdog hero here is? The rich crazy televangelists doom sayers and gun hoarding militias". Just... wtf???

Far Cry 3 was good, 4 was alright, but 5 is such a painful shit pile. I've seen some awful endings to games, but none of them have made me as furious, frustrated, and completely and physically uncomfortable as Far Cry 5's did. Bioshock has a clever twist ending. Spec Ops has a clever twist ending. This isn't a twist. This is a massive shit.

I hate it even more for how that game was marketed. A game that screams out how much it has something to say and, when finally handed the mic, either mumbles and says nothing, or ends up validating and vindicating the very thing it was screaming that they wanted to make harsh commentary on?

I don't get it. I really don't get how anyone signed off on this game and thought these were good ideas. What even is the message here? When you encounter tyranny and oppression, you lay down your arms and "let it happen"? Because "maybe their oppression and murder is justified"? The fuck is this???

Edited by InkDagger on Jul 17th 2020 at 4:38:24 AM

My thoughts exactly. This sort of shitbag does not get to be right OR be justified in his horrific behavior no matter the outcome of the game.

So how did you two feel about Pagan Min actually letting Ajay settle his mother's ashes and being friendly toward him - if you just do what he asked, sit and eat, and don't join La Résistance?

Edited by FOFD on Jul 17th 2020 at 6:06:38 AM

I mean, why wouldn't he?

He stabbed a man in the shoulder in front of some perfectly good crab rangoon. The man is clearly psychotic and Ajay's mom was smart to leave him.

You don't stab a man next to crab rangoon. That's just wrong.

Edited by FOFD on Jul 17th 2020 at 6:23:01 AM

Ink Dagger said what I've been trying to for months. Fuck FC 5, its villains and its plot. If you give me opponents so blatantly evil, do not try and pretend they are right and don't deserve to die.

As for Pagan....he was evil but he was fun evil. And his opponents were just as bad. And the game never claimed he was in the right. Big difference.

There's also the fact that, outside of scattering his ashes, Ajay has literally no business in Kyrat.

But then he decides to take the insurgents showing up at their word and the end result is a whole lot of death, at least one betrayal and one dictatorship being replaced with another. With the difference being that the new dictator isn't as willing to step aside and hand the reins over to Ajay.

Pagan Min's evil and unhinged - but he has no quarrel with Ajay. Again, why would he? He doesn't even begrudge Ishwari for leaving and doesn't hold it against Ajay that his father murdered Pagan's daughter.

And even in the end he's mostly baffled:

Honestly, the main message of 4 is pretty much "Don't go meddle in another country's affairs, if you don't even have a full picture of the facts on the ground".

Edited by DrunkenNordmann on Jul 17th 2020 at 4:12:39 PM

He might have had a point about preparing for the apocalypse, but that doesn't excuse him and the rest of Project at Eden's Gate for being so violent towards those who were skeptical. I wouldn't really call his portrayal in New Dawn some kind of hero, but a Retired Monster who's starting to doubt his past actions. I don't know if I would have made New Eden an ally given their actions in the previous game, but the game tries its best to tell you that you shouldn't worry about them (or rather, all but one of them).

Pagan Min is a unique case in that he never intentionally spites Ajay, for story reasons. Most of Ajay's beef with him is through is subordinates (and it's mostly Yuma Lau), but also with how Pagan antagonizes other characters that Ajay happens to be fighting for (and they're certainly no saints, especially when one person of command gets too power hungry). Joseph Seed's antagonism is more direct, and his heralds even more so. You do get to kill the rest of his family, but I would have preferred it if Joseph Seed was killed at the end, and then the nukes go off if the writers intended to give him credence. The big thing that plagues Far Cry 5's ending and implications is through Poor Communication Kills.

Poor Communication is probably, like, the biggest understatement that could be made about Joseph Seed and his ilk. As though anything they could say would change our reaction to them when... like, many of them are people who are totally willing to just go straight up butcher a few towns if Joseph says so. Even if Joseph was somehow a poor communicator and nothing more, these regular goons are probably just jumping on the excuse bandwagon... y'know, the ones who aren't tortured or drugged into it all.

If the game HAS to make the Nuke the World ending a... thing, the most obvious and thematic shut down of Joseph's insanity is that his blood thirsty "salvation" is probably the exact same mentality of various countries and political leaders leading to that Nuke Ending in the first place; Joseph is probably just them on a much much smaller scale.

I don't think the fact that the Cult Leader was right about the apocalypse makes him any more justified in his horrific actions. I actually thought it was perfectly appropriate that he can't convince you because his family is a bunch of psychopaths. Ergo, he ends up killing more people than he could have saved.

I dunno, if you do kill Joseph and the game...ends? Is that a good ending?

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Jul 17th 2020 at 9:08:05 AM

I mean, yeah? Is there something wrong with a hard fought victory where good wins? Up until the bomb dropped, the ending was playing 'The Power of Friendship' the most straight I'd seen in a long time. The boss fight was literally getting all your friends un-mind controlled, helping them up, and ALL OF YOU kicking the bad guy's ass.

Of all things, I hadn't expected THE POWER OF FRIENDSHIP to be the final boss trope. It actually feels pretty satisfying up to that point. The villain's power has crumbled and he's a weak pathetic piece of shit screaming on the ground and throwing a tantrum. And the entire ending goes to crap the SECOND those birds start flying away.

I'd written it out in the FC 5 thread and I could even salvage the bomb ending, if it absolutely had to stay and be a thing. Arrest Joseph Seed. Let him writhe on the ground. Air Sirens go off. Everyone freaks out and starts panicking, but luckily we remember that Joseph has a shelter under the church. Pull the key off him and we go unlock the door and start getting everyone down into safety. As you're closing the door, Joseph charges and tries to push his way in, crying and begging and screaming that he was right. You either kick him out the door and close it on him, or the rest of the people in the shelter come and help you close it on his fingers.

Insert some radio lines of other major characters (The newborn and her mother most notibly because wtf Ubisoft) making it to bunkers in time and maybe some ending something or other about eventually being rescued and walking out into a changed world and, despite the destruction and horror, they were a community that learned to stand together, stronger, and especially in face of awful horrors coming from their own people. Something heavy, but a little uplifting that we can come back from it. It's what we needed in 2018 after... gestures vaguely to the last several years.

Ubisoft for whatever reason generally struggles to write actually compelling characters and plots outside of the Assassin's Creed series, so I wouldn't put too much hope in them. I'd like to be interested in this due to Giancarlo Esposito, but cynically I'm also wondering if they're just using a known actor as a selling point but won't actually commit to his character.

That...definitely would have made the ending better, if the Deus ex Nukina had to be a thing. Hell, it would still open the gates up for New Dawn, and you can just cut out Joseph Seed from that story as a result. Building affinity with all your allies in Hope County was the best part of Far Cry 5.

I never looked into New Dawn and I don't think I ever will. Still too pissed off from 5's ending and I've heard that, one, it just further validates Joseph's monstrous nature and quite frankly I've got better things to do with my time than that nonsense and, two, your 5 PC shows up as a mute victim of Joseph or something, which just reminds me more of the whole 'Rape/Torture plaything for Joseph' part of the ending and I'm instantly uncomfortable again.

Ugh, I read through the work page last night and was a little horrified to see how many ending related entries fully give into Joseph's bullshit. My own contributions are long since gone. And I see a lot of them also bring up the "Walk Away" ending as the "Good" ending and make it sound like... it's the player's fault for trying to arrest Joseph and everything going to shit? Uh, he's still murdering and torturing people? He's still a bad guy that needs to be stopped? And just simply my opposition to him is apparently a bad choice? lolwut?

Again, the messaging that "In face of tyranny and oppression, just let it happen and do whatever they want" is... kinda horrific. I don't mind stories that go into how rebellion is hard and can fall apart, even if I kinda think those stories are a tad too pervasive and cynical all the time, but this is... even the very act of rebellion is the wrong choice???

I don't get it. I really don't. And I get even less who signed off on this and why.