IGN likes Farcry

Me too, I played the x-box's farcry games and liked them. This looks cool because they controlls look decent (well alot better than red steel). Although I am afraid the new farcry game might be too much like the x-box far cry games, but I will probably still pick it up, looks good.
 
It's funny on how the second page the caption for the second picture is "Getting headshots has never been easier" and it doesn't show a headshot.

The whole holding down A to allow free aim sounds like it will work very well.

I enjoyed the second storyline in the 360 version of Far Cry (The first was too long and boring), so if this version is anything like that I'll pick it up when there is a deal on it.
 
Man i can't wait. I really have never gotten into FPS but i played Red Steel and actually really liked it. I realize it isn't a great game but i thought it was a lot of fun, and it definitely got me excited for what is possible on this system.
 
Of course, they love every game in the preview. Then the final review depends on how much cash Ubisoft forks over.
 
[quote name='Kaijufan']It's funny on how the second page the caption for the second picture is "Getting headshots has never been easier" an

I enjoyed the second storyline in the 360 version of Far Cry (The first was too long and boring), so if this version is anything like that I'll pick it up when there is a deal on it.[/QUOTE]
the last time I checked, the wii game is the 2nd story. except there's no mapmaker
 
They're not really clear on how new this is compared to Evolution. They say it's a new story but then they talk about 3 new maps. Huh?
 
Hmm these graphics almost look like PS1. Worst I've seen for sure on Wii. Too bad they just ported it over or w/e. Anyway hopefully in the end it controls well...I really want to try a Wii shooter with the best controls possible.
 
[quote name='Spades22']Hmm these graphics almost look like PS1. Worst I've seen for sure on Wii. Too bad they just ported it over or w/e. Anyway hopefully in the end it controls well...I really want to try a Wii shooter with the best controls possible.[/QUOTE]
They don't look close to PS1.
Looks... okay... but no amazing Gamecube looking game here. Like Botticus, fix the framerate and I'm down.
 
Well I said almost, and I think it is somewhat close. It doesnt look like a PS1 game, but looks worse than a PS2 and better than a PS1...somewhere in the middle there
 
does look bland but come on... ps1? you gotta be kidding

i know ive been spoiled with my 360 version (which i have to finish fuck) but its atleast gamecube graphics.. gotta see final build
 
Ya I didnt say PS1...man you guys gotta learn to read. ALMOST PS1. I guess I should have said IN BETWEEN PS1 and PS2.
 
Yeah I've been complaining about the Wii's graphics (and so does IGN in this preview), but even I have to admit it's not as bad as the PS1.
 
[quote name='rickonker']Yeah I've been complaining about the Wii's graphics (and so does IGN in this preview), but even I have to admit it's not as bad as the PS1.[/QUOTE]

Running jokes FOR THE WIN!
 
In regard to the comments on "the wii being capable of more graphicaly"...I fully agree. I think as the life of this system progresses, programmers are going to figure out how to program top notch graphics better and easier so games will look good.

as an example; gta 3 on ps2 looked good but gta: san andreas look way way way better on ps2. same system just the programmers were able to stretch the systems capabilities and make things look way better with a good framerate.

T. Foolery
 
I believe the "I" in IGN stands for "Infomercial".

Even if the game is quality, I've already got Far Cry for the PC and 360. Maybe I'll remember it and reconsider in April when someone posts the "Far Cry Wii @ Gamfely*, $14.99!! And OTher Deals! Free S&H for Members!!" thread.

*--Typo intentional. Here.
 
[quote name='Spades22']You guys don't deserve to comment on the graphics if you can't read.[/QUOTE]
You said it looks almost as bad as PSone. As in very close to PSone? They're no where close to that kind of quality.
 
IU guess the main beef with people is that why is Farcry on wii actually look worse than a cheaper last gen system?

Some peoel say wii game doesn't look too good right now because it is a new system. But isnt wii suppose have a very similiar system wish to GC but have a more powerful processor and graphic capability? Then tapping full power og wii should bre easy.
 
That could become an even bigger concern when companies can't 'port' the Gamecube version over to the Wii anymore, namely due to the fact that within months, games won't have a Gamecube version anymore. Or an Xbox or PS2 version. I really wonder how many companies (EDIT: at that point in time) will sink the appropriate amount of money into making a Wii game that will actually be a polished-looking one.

I mean, if you know a good chunk of the Wii owners either don't care about graphics or are ignorant to where the graphics in theory should be (read: the coveted 'non-gamers'), what's the incentive to try harder? For me, sub-Gamecube graphics are inexcusable, and I don't even want to consider some of the sub-PS2 s*** I've been reading about. This isn't a 'getting acclimated to the tech' issue, kids.
 
[quote name='jollydwarf']For me, sub-Gamecube graphics are inexcusable, and I don't even want to consider some of the sub-PS2 s*** I've been reading about.[/QUOTE]

I had to read your post twice because I couldn't believe I was reading this in the Wii forum.
 
Hey, I have no loyalties. Except the truth, and you know what Jack Nicholson said to the fanboy(s) about "the truth"....
 
See, former non-gamers aren't going to buy Far Cry and games of that nature. So if they want to sell their game, they'll need to at least give us graphics comparable to what we were just playing a year ago. That's kinda the whole basis of the "graphics aren't important" argument. They're good enough this gen, so giving us more of that is fine. That's not saying "please give us early shitty 3D concepts all over again."

If they don't want to spend time making games look nice, give us 2D gaming.
 
[quote name='Sir_Fragalot']Me too, I played the x-box's farcry games and liked them. This looks cool because they controlls look decent (well alot better than red steel). Although I am afraid the new farcry game might be too much like the x-box far cry games, but I will probably still pick it up, looks good.[/QUOTE]

I too have both FarCry's for xbox, and I'm afraid the wii version is going to suck compared to those. The control looked painfully slow when turning around to fight enemies and the graphics look like crap, don't get me wrong I love my wii but it looks like they removed the "bump-mapping" all together. which also makes me worry that my wii might not even be as powerful as my xbox ... I mean graphically, you know, how it handles textures and anti-aliasing.
 
Then I believe I changed what I thought shortly after saying "in between ps1 and ps2". No way these are PS2 graphics.

Actually the "almost" PS1 graphics would be better than "almost" PS2. I think these graphics suck so bad they're closer to what we saw at the end of PS1. So...eh...I guess I do think they're almost PS1 haha
 
Wow, I guess when you take away the Zelda fanaticism, it's obvious what the reality is. I'm definitely not the only one saying the graphics blow here.
 
What are you talking about? Everyone can see these graphics blow...Zeldas doesn't. No excuse for graphics to be this bad
 
[quote name='Spades22']What are you talking about? Everyone can see these graphics blow...Zeldas doesn't. No excuse for graphics to be this bad[/QUOTE]
Well, what I meant by "blow" is worse than the first Xbox. Both games fit that description.
 
I don't care so much about the graphics since I have nothing to relate it to, but a shitty framerate is a shitty framerate no matter what the game looks like.

Let's put it this way, assuming they fix the framerate problem: If the game plays better than Red Steel, but looks worse, I will buy it. If it looks better than Red Steel but doesn't control as well, I'm not buying it.
 
Zelda fits the description of worse than Xbox? Maybe the odd game is better, but in no way is it worse than the majority of Xbox games. Farcry on the other hand...
 
[quote name='Spades22']Zelda fits the description of worse than Xbox? Maybe the odd game is better, but in no way is it worse than the majority of Xbox games. Farcry on the other hand...[/QUOTE]
Would you agree that Splinter Cell on Xbox has better graphics than Zelda? Of course we can disagree on this, but my opinion is that any Wii game should look better than any 4 year old Xbox game.

I don't know about the majority of Xbox games, because I haven't played that many, but I can think of a lot of Xbox games that have better graphics than Zelda.
 
Zelda was made for the GC though, so that one has a bit of an excuse at least. The others...not so much. I mean right now all I expect from the Wii is top of the great graphics we saw from like the end of the GC and PS2...and some games don't even meet this standard. Zelda I think meets it pretty good, and it was built for the GC yet.
 
[quote name='Spades22']Zelda was made for the GC though, so that one has a bit of an excuse at least.[/quote]

This is true, but to me it's a reason, not an excuse. If Halo looked like Marathon just because it was originally a Mac game, I don't think people would have been so forgiving.

The others...not so much. I mean right now all I expect from the Wii is top of the great graphics we saw from like the end of the GC and PS2...and some games don't even meet this standard. Zelda I think meets it pretty good, and it was built for the GC yet.
Click to expand...

Just wondering why you don't include the Xbox too?
 
Simply cause I've never played an Xbox. None of my friends EVER bought one. 3 of them had just PS2s and 3 of them had PS2s and GCs...like me. So thats why since I've never really seen the Xbox graphics first hand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top