Random Gaming News

My biggest issue with Farcry series in general is that it is a fundamentally OPEN WORLD.. then you start a mission and when you stray outside of a pre-set boundary the screen alerts you that you are GOING OUTSIDE OF THE MISSION ZONE.

UBISOFT, F*CKING TAKE THAT SH1T OUT YOU DUMB F*CKS
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't call metacritic a review either. I'm talking what actual people had to say about the game.

Quote:
This is the core truth of Far Cry, a series that still has a lot going for it, but remains in serious need of a revamp. It is a moribund apparatus of conquest that is unable to tell any story other than the rise to power of a well-armed outsider over a lushly imagined, exoticised realm, however urgently it might try.

Quote:
Far Cry 5's world is meticulously constructed, and it's a remarkable facsimile of Big Sky Country. Unfortunately, too much of the action in it is uninspired. It's a beautiful but bland recitation of what's come before, from both the series and Ubisoft's open-world playbook. It's never bad, but considering how great the past games have been, its overall predictability is disappointing.

Quote:
Far Cry 5 is a game that struggles in trying to serve two purposes. On one hand, there's a dark, horrific tale of a cult taking over a small town. On the other, it's a playground of destruction, letting players fly and drive around, blowing up things with a bear and a dog. Both sides are good, but they don't really meet in the middle.

Quote:
There are great individual moments in Far Cry 5. The gunplay is excellent, its unpredictable world generates daring stories of accidental heroism, and when it leans into the whole red-blooded American patriotism schtick, it's genuinely funny. It doesn't always fit together as well as it should, sometimes forcing the player to work around the game rather than with it – but the wildly vacillating tone is the bigger issue. It's at once disorienting and noncommittal. Paradoxically, this is an extreme satire of modern America that says pretty much nothing about it.

Just a few quotes from a few sites that sum it up to me. This has been the deal with Farcry for a long time. It's a game, it's fun to play around in, but nothing spectacular pops out. They have a very good copy paste formula with this series that sells.

Are you even trying to make sense these days? Just quit your bull****

1) I don't even know why you're arguing with Omo about Metacritic. You're basically saying its a useless site because it only aggregates a score and not reviews. You do know that Metacritic is meant to be unbiased and collects reviews and their scores from critics and users and gives an overall score based on that information, right? You can see the score then look at blurbs of the reviews then choose to read the full review. Its a better system because they're not the ones writing the reviews and giving out the score. You can get blurbs from all of the reviews with sources and links to the full reviews: Far Cry 5 Critic Reviews for PlayStation 4 - Metacritic

2) You say you care about "what actual people had to say about the game." Fine, but then you post 4 paragraphs and don't contribute them to a person or a site or give us a source. Then you said, "Just a few quotes from a few sites that sum it up to me." Basically your post is exactly what Metacritic does. That's kind of funny, huh?

3) You didn't actually get those 4 quotes from 4 different sources, you got them from a Gamespot article that you literally just copied/pasted and left out the 5th blurb which was Gamespots that gave the game a 9/10. Pretty biased, right? Oh, and its exactly what Metacritic already does without bias: https://www.gamespot.com/articles/far-cry-5-reviews-roundup-heres-what-critics-think/1100-6457684/

I can't wait for you to talk your way out of this one
 
Are you even trying to make sense these days? Just quit your bull****

1) I don't even know why you're arguing with Omo about Metacritic. You're basically saying its a useless site because it only aggregates a score and not reviews. You do know that Metacritic is meant to be unbiased and collects reviews and their scores from critics and users and gives an overall score based on that information, right? You can see the score then look at blurbs of the reviews then choose to read the full review. Its a better system because they're not the ones writing the reviews and giving out the score. You can get blurbs from all of the reviews with sources and links to the full reviews: Far Cry 5 Critic Reviews for PlayStation 4 - Metacritic

2) You say you care about "what actual people had to say about the game." Fine, but then you post 4 paragraphs and don't contribute them to a person or a site or give us a source. Then you said, "Just a few quotes from a few sites that sum it up to me." Basically your post is exactly what Metacritic does. That's kind of funny, huh?

3) You didn't actually get those 4 quotes from 4 different sources, you got them from a Gamespot article that you literally just copied/pasted and left out the 5th blurb which was Gamespots that gave the game a 9/10. Pretty biased, right? Oh, and its exactly what Metacritic already does without bias: https://www.gamespot.com/articles/far-cry-5-reviews-roundup-heres-what-critics-think/1100-6457684/

I can't wait for you to talk your way out of this one

1 I'm arguing over metacritic because it's quite literally what I said and even what YOU said. It's a conglomerate of numbers put into one site. I explained myself on that already, a number doesn't tell me ****. Let's take my FF15 response to Krazy for example, he asked me what I'd rate. I said a 7. Does that explain the rest of what I said? No. If for example somebody wants to argue how "good a game is" metacritic is exactly what comes up. "Oh well it got a 9 on Meta" cool story, that number doesn't tell squat. That is precisely what happened "Well it must be good because it got this on meta". This was directly after me saying it is getting mediocre reviews. I then back that up with what I quoted as what I was reading explains what I felt for the Farcry series as a whole, which segways into #2.

2 Those 4 quotes are from 4 different pre-review sources. Try again. I left out what Gamespot said because I was quoting what I what I had felt for the series as a whole for quite some time. He even asked me what I was afraid of here let me source that for you.

5 got mediocre reviews, mainly all saying the one thing I was afraid of.
Far Cry 5 for PlayStation 4 Reviews - Metacritic

I wouldn't call an 8.1average mediocre per se, but I was hoping more around a 9. Still it's Far Cry so I'm sure I'll play it at some point and love it. What was the one thing you were afraid of?

Perfectly sums up exactly what I was saying in #1, and here you are arguing in favor of proving my point. He said I wouldn't call an 8.1 average mediocre yet that's not what I was talking about. He asked specifically what I was afraid of, the mediocre part came from the actual writing of what I quoted. The game feels like it pulls apart from itself, has no direction. Those quotes perfectly sums it up for me, exactly what I said. Metacritic is all about the numbers, literally any time it's quoted. Don't even pretend like it isn't. What was the argument about CoD all the time for years? High meta average? Exactly. Can you pull reviews off Meta? Sure. Is that the point? No.

3 There's no bias, I was using those quotes to answer his question. The Gamespot article that I had actually saw on a FB group I was currently browsing happened to have those reviews that was easier to toss in rather than type it myself. Bias would be me posting the meme "Farcry 5 is ****, try to change my mind" then after some reviews are posted I would say "yea that's a negative from me ghostrider". Not what I did in the least, as I've played all the Farcry games so far and they all do the same thing and those 4 blurbs put into perspective exactly what I wanted to say. I left out the Gamespot review because it didn't answer the question.

I can't wait for you to try and **** post harder.
 
1 I'm arguing over metacritic because it's quite literally what I said and even what YOU said. It's a conglomerate of numbers put into one site. I explained myself on that already, a number doesn't tell me ****. Let's take my FF15 response to Krazy for example, he asked me what I'd rate. I said a 7. Does that explain the rest of what I said? No. If for example somebody wants to argue how "good a game is" metacritic is exactly what comes up. "Oh well it got a 9 on Meta" cool story, that number doesn't tell squat. That is precisely what happened "Well it must be good because it got this on meta". This was directly after me saying it is getting mediocre reviews. I then back that up with what I quoted as what I was reading explains what I felt for the Farcry series as a whole, which segways into #2.

2 Those 4 quotes are from 4 different pre-review sources. Try again. I left out what Gamespot said because I was quoting what I what I had felt for the series as a whole for quite some time. He even asked me what I was afraid of here let me source that for you.




Perfectly sums up exactly what I was saying in #1, and here you are arguing in favor of proving my point. He said I wouldn't call an 8.1 average mediocre yet that's not what I was talking about. He asked specifically what I was afraid of, the mediocre part came from the actual writing of what I quoted. The game feels like it pulls apart from itself, has no direction. Those quotes perfectly sums it up for me, exactly what I said. Metacritic is all about the numbers, literally any time it's quoted. Don't even pretend like it isn't. What was the argument about CoD all the time for years? High meta average? Exactly. Can you pull reviews off Meta? Sure. Is that the point? No.

3 There's no bias, I was using those quotes to answer his question. The Gamespot article that I had actually saw on a FB group I was currently browsing happened to have those reviews that was easier to toss in rather than type it myself. Bias would be me posting the meme "Farcry 5 is ****, try to change my mind" then after some reviews are posted I would say "yea that's a negative from me ghostrider". Not what I did in the least, as I've played all the Farcry games so far and they all do the same thing and those 4 blurbs put into perspective exactly what I wanted to say. I left out the Gamespot review because it didn't answer the question.

I can't wait for you to try and **** post harder.

Dude, you literally read 1 crappy article from a very biased news source and tried to post like you knew what you were talking about. You get called out and are trying to weasel out. Hit me with those outdated memes brah, I don't mind. I'm sure you're still memeing harambe with your boys
 
Dude, you literally read 1 crappy article from a very biased news source and tried to post like you knew what you were talking about. You get called out and are trying to weasel out. Hit me with those outdated memes brah, I don't mind. I'm sure you're still memeing harambe with your boys
You got schooled because you skimmed over a few posts and got called out on your **** posting. Try harder bro, I'm sure your 4chan neckbeard buddies still think you're funny. Maybe next time don't completely miss the point of a post. Now go run and hide for a few months like you normally do before coming back to **** post more.
 
You got schooled because you skimmed over a few posts and got called out on your **** posting. Try harder bro, I'm sure your 4chan neckbeard buddies still think you're funny. Maybe next time don't completely miss the point of a post. Now go run and hide for a few months like you normally do before coming back to **** post more.

Wow, you're pretty upset over this one, huh? Sorry to have ruined your day so badly
 
Back
Top Bottom