We need to have another talk. I’ve been seeing reviewers of older games say a lot of stuff we disagree with. So we wanted to offer a bit of pushback, and give what we feel is a better picture of a few games.

The first of these is going to be about Far Cry 4. People usually say that it’s a copy and paste of 3. Then they say 2 or 3 is the best of the series, which we really disagree with. Most will say 3 but there’s a cult following for 2.

We’ve played all the games and we’d say 4 was the best. Yes it does take a lot from FC3, but it improves on it. The gunplay was improved, your weapon turns faster and doesn’t look overly large on the screen. Graphically FC4 still looks good, while in 3, the AO and lighting are off and you have to download mods to fix it. The crazy part is the games came out just two years apart.

The setup for it is very unique. In FC3, your vacationing on an island and are taken hostage. Your brother dies and you have to survive and kill the pirates and Vaas. In FC4, your mother has died and asked you to spread her ashes at Lukshana, in your home country of Kyrat. The country is in the middle of civil war.

After you arrive in Kyrat, the bus you’re on is stopped by royal troops and they start shooting. Their leader Pagan Min lands in a helicopter, stabs a guard for shooting, takes a selfie with you and then takes you to his palace for dinner. Then the palace is attacked and you can choose to stay in the palace or escape. If you stay you will unlock a secret…..

If you escape you will be fighting with Pagan’s enemy the Golden Path. Then you have the outposts, tower and propaganda centers to capture. Along with stuff that everyone said that was already in FC3. I felt the world and animals seem to all want to kill you more. Many times I’ve snuck up to an outpost and realized a tiger or leopard is right behind me, and I have to fight it and the guards off.

Then there’s the complaint that map itself is the same size as 3’s. That’s not an issue, it’s what you do with the world. There’s more of a variety of locations. The Nepal and Buddhist inspiration is still unique in a game today. You can also fly to the Himalayas to do missions in a blizzard. As well as this game has a lot of mysticism in it. There’s these missions where you relive old Buddhist legends and there’s a prison and boss mission where you’re hallucinating while fighting with creatures from those legends.

Back to the story, spoilers are ahead, you begin to ask questions. Was I saved or kidnapped by the Golden Path? As much as their two leaders want to liberate Kyrat, one wants to make a drug cartel, the other wants to make ISL. They present you with their sides when they disagree on something and the missions change depending on who you side with. That wasn’t in FC3. At some point you may have to kill one of them. They are using you to achieve their aims. Then you realize Pagan really hasn’t done anything to you, his men just defended themselves and you’re destroying everything. Then when you see Pagan he breaks the whole story to you. Lukshana isn’t a place, it’s his kid and your half sister. Your father who is a Golden Path founder and legend, pushed your mother to be a spy on Pagan. Pagan and her fell in love and had Lukshana, when your father found out he killed the baby. Then your mother killed him and fled the country. Then Pagan went after the Golden Path. It seems that of the two sides warring, Pagan knows the fighting won’t ever end. Unlike either of the Golden Path leaders who say we’re what’s best for Kyrat, Pagan says that you are. He then leaves you the country.

This is why I say the story of FC4 is on another level to 3. Yeah Jason becomes dark and vengeful, but it’s not as dark as this. If you played FC4 first and go back and play 3 you’ll notice the differences. Compared to 4, 3 feels more dumbed down than the game they claim is a copy and paste. FC5 and 6 also feel dumbed down and simplistic as well compared to FC4. If you haven’t go give this a play.