12 statues spread across a city which is difficult to traverse at will. Sometimes it puzzles me, the mind of a person who comes up with this crap. The mental approach has to be "watch our glorious city since we devs worked hard to make it". While this is semi-optional, "semi" because you do need leaders to cash in for those upgrades, it boggles my mind how someone in their sane mind comes up with this.

Even without any enemies, fully marked statues with immediate teleport to each statue, it would still be a horrible quest. Some things I just can´t comprehend. 2 or 3 ... okay, but 12?

Far Cry hasn´t developed much story wise, it´s still railroaded and the protagonist has no major choices, the story kills off some characters and replayability may suffer due to knowing that nothing can be changed. You can play the same story again, that´s it. While I loved the previous Far Cry games I was definitely expecting some development in this regard.

The perk system has gone and for many leveling equals bigger rewards than what the game offers, it´s expected from games. The various outfits just don´t really cut it.

It´s much of the same otherwise, nothing ground breaking to separate Far Cry 6 from it´s previous titles.

These are just thoughts/things about the game:

1. Wanted human companions.
2. Wanted to capture those stupid forts.
3. Didn´t feel rewarded for leveling up.
4. Would want to prevent the deaths of at least 2 people in a replay.
5. Since the overclocked guns are the most powerful let us customize the unique guns.
6. I still hate fishing.
7. Wanted new things to do ...

Overall Far Cry 6 is just more of the same, it´s by no means a bad game, I enjoyed my playthrough but I was definitely wishing for more innovation. Don´t know if a comparison to Fallout 4 can be made, but story wise Fallout 4 did things much better when it comes to choices (not the story itself), the fact is that like many others I spent over 400 hours in building mode which is my fault. Imagine if Far Cry let your build your own base in free mode as an optional thing.

I actually enjoyed my first playthrough, there were casualties, some I saw coming and others took me by surprise. It´s a story and war is a bloody mess, I was fine with how things developed but I have approached my second playthrough very differently due to actually knowing I can´t change things. Regardless of what I do some of those my character cares about will be kicking daisies, Far Cry 6 doesn´t have multiple outcomes in those scenarios.

I have been skipping the story all together in my second playthrough which probably will remain unfinished as I am going to conquer as much of Yara by myself as I can. Already finished one zone, all the treasure hunts, side stories, checkpoints and facilities. Reading a bit more than I did first time around and paying more attention to details around the landscape. I just don´t want to start the story and watch the same people die again knowing I cant change things.

The weird thing is that I am actually having fun with just messing about, once I am done with all of Yara I guess I will crown myself a dictator ....

I finished AC Odyssey which I did like, was too long and just did the main story in the end, the whole cult business didn´t really interest me after doing the story. I did get the feeling though that the character pretty much stayed authentic to his personality for the majority of the campaign, some discrepancies here and there but nothing I felt worth contemplating.

In AC Valhalla I feel I am controlling Jekyll & Hyde at times, he supports peace and understands the necessity for stability while at the same time ravaging the countryside for silver and glory. While I am only killing soldiers in those raids, we all know that´s merely to spare the audience the for the true horror some raids did cause. My thread is however not about how Vikings were, it´s about the main character only and he is a feather in the wind, some roleplaying can lean him towards being more violent/peaceful but in the end he is not much different from the villains we slay, he causes chaos and mayhem at will in every raid.

I do realise it´s a game and "Viking" activities are required, so we are put through the entire spectrum of Viking ordeals from an entertainment point of view. Most games do manage to keep their characters somewhat aligned towards a specific mentality, Eivor however seems in dialogue to be much more mentally capable than in his actions. In a way it´s like he is a different character in the campaign than he is in pretty much everything else.

I am a bit tired of trying to unlock vehicles by driving them to the blue square next to the vehicle pickup points, it doesn´t give any extra resources nor does it unlock any new cars.

In the beginning it felt a bit weird killing females, had to remind myself it was just a game. To those claiming absurdity within the Farcry concept, f.ex. how a rooster takes on elite soldiers, that really doesn´t apply to the protective instinct which many males have. There is a reason why we don´t murder children in any game I know, my caveman instinct did throttle for a moment when I started to play Farcry 6, I didn´t feel comfortable killing women. After a couple of hours I reached a compromise which was to stop the machete kills, it´s too detailed and actually I stopped doing it for both sexes.

What´s the difference you may ask? Killing is killing? It´s just a game. It´s an individual threshold which we all have and I am not judging anyone for how they were brought up. I do believe in equal rights, I asked my better half about my "macho meter", she stated I could be a bit over protective at times but otherwise I am not much of an old fashioned gentleman. She earns more than I do and I am fine with that.

I did bring up children because the African continent probably has more child soldiers than most would like to know, should realism apply here as well? I think not. I use a sniper mostly and don´t think too much about it, yes, it´s just a game, but as I stated ... each of us have our limits to what we want depicted in a game.

We all have individual preferences, a guilty pleasure of mine with Fallout 4 was spending over 400 hours building bases, I know many have spent more time doing it, Youtube is full of examples and some are rather creative. In fact it became such an obsession to get the best base possible that I entirely forgot about the main story at some point, what was I supposed to do? It was however very satisfying to accomplish the impossible, to get the limited settler AI to actually function with your base setup.

At first when I started playing Fallout I never imagined base building would be something I would approve of, not my cup of tea usually, somehow things changed and I got furious when a bunch of no good mutants destroyed a lot of my hard work. The best thing though, it was optional, you didn´t actually have to do it. If it was mandatory I probably would never gotten into base building in the first place.

Bases have been around in Far Cry for a while, although in preset conditions, why not take it a step further and incorporate it into the story? Optionally with some presets people could just place down in order to avoid building stuff if it isn´t their thing. You expand your base/bases with materials, build houses, techno facilities etc. with inventory etc.

Would this be a good idea or should Far Cry´s innovation which many seem to asking for go in a different direction? I know it´s a "story shooter" but so is Fallout.

@sofajockey It would definitely be innovation within the Far Cry series, while I agree with the fact that they are two very different games think about how pretty you could build your bases in Far Cry, gives me the itches.

I finished AC Odyssey which I did like, was too long and just did the main story in the end, the whole cult business didn´t really interest me after doing the story. I did get the feeling though that the character pretty much stayed authentic to his personality for the majority of the campaign, some discrepancies here and there but nothing I felt worth contemplating.

In AC Valhalla I feel I am controlling Jekyll & Hyde at times, he supports peace and understands the necessity for stability while at the same time ravaging the countryside for silver and glory. While I am only killing soldiers in those raids, we all know that´s merely to spare the audience the for the true horror some raids did cause. My thread is however not about how Vikings were, it´s about the main character only and he is a feather in the wind, some roleplaying can lean him towards being more violent/peaceful but in the end he is not much different from the villains we slay, he causes chaos and mayhem at will in every raid.

I do realise it´s a game and "Viking" activities are required, so we are put through the entire spectrum of Viking ordeals from an entertainment point of view. Most games do manage to keep their characters somewhat aligned towards a specific mentality, Eivor however seems in dialogue to be much more mentally capable than in his actions. In a way it´s like he is a different character in the campaign than he is in pretty much everything else.

I can´t play co-op as there apparently seems to be something wrong with my connection, I have an open NAT and have tried to forward the necessary ports, something I have until now never done on my current configuration.

I can play any other game, Battlefield, Overwatch, Solstice and many more just fine, have never needed any sort of special configuration. However it´s impossible for me to join a co-op game, I get timed out with trapper-ce15cee7. The list of codes says I should just restart my game, that does nothing, I get the same error code again.

Tried disabling the software firewall and the same error code. Am I the only one with this?

@sofajockey It would definitely be innovation within the Far Cry series, while I agree with the fact that they are two very different games think about how pretty you could build your bases in Far Cry, gives me the itches.

I have no problems with any other games when it comes to multiplayer, the fix listed "somewhere" suggests that I restart the game and it should work, it doesn´t. I always get this message when I attempt co-op.

We all have individual preferences, a guilty pleasure of mine with Fallout 4 was spending over 400 hours building bases, I know many have spent more time doing it, Youtube is full of examples and some are rather creative. In fact it became such an obsession to get the best base possible that I entirely forgot about the main story at some point, what was I supposed to do? It was however very satisfying to accomplish the impossible, to get the limited settler AI to actually function with your base setup.

At first when I started playing Fallout I never imagined base building would be something I would approve of, not my cup of tea usually, somehow things changed and I got furious when a bunch of no good mutants destroyed a lot of my hard work. The best thing though, it was optional, you didn´t actually have to do it. If it was mandatory I probably would never gotten into base building in the first place.

Bases have been around in Far Cry for a while, although in preset conditions, why not take it a step further and incorporate it into the story? Optionally with some presets people could just place down in order to avoid building stuff if it isn´t their thing. You expand your base/bases with materials, build houses, techno facilities etc. with inventory etc.

Would this be a good idea or should Far Cry´s innovation which many seem to asking for go in a different direction? I know it´s a "story shooter" but so is Fallout.

Far Cry hasn´t developed much story wise, it´s still railroaded and the protagonist has no major choices, the story kills off some characters and replayability may suffer due to knowing that nothing can be changed. You can play the same story again, that´s it. While I loved the previous Far Cry games I was definitely expecting some development in this regard.

The perk system has gone and for many leveling equals bigger rewards than what the game offers, it´s expected from games. The various outfits just don´t really cut it.

It´s much of the same otherwise, nothing ground breaking to separate Far Cry 6 from it´s previous titles.

These are just thoughts/things about the game:

1. Wanted human companions.
2. Wanted to capture those stupid forts.
3. Didn´t feel rewarded for leveling up.
4. Would want to prevent the deaths of at least 2 people in a replay.
5. Since the overclocked guns are the most powerful let us customize the unique guns.
6. I still hate fishing.
7. Wanted new things to do ...

Overall Far Cry 6 is just more of the same, it´s by no means a bad game, I enjoyed my playthrough but I was definitely wishing for more innovation. Don´t know if a comparison to Fallout 4 can be made, but story wise Fallout 4 did things much better when it comes to choices (not the story itself), the fact is that like many others I spent over 400 hours in building mode which is my fault. Imagine if Far Cry let your build your own base in free mode as an optional thing.

I actually enjoyed my first playthrough, there were casualties, some I saw coming and others took me by surprise. It´s a story and war is a bloody mess, I was fine with how things developed but I have approached my second playthrough very differently due to actually knowing I can´t change things. Regardless of what I do some of those my character cares about will be kicking daisies, Far Cry 6 doesn´t have multiple outcomes in those scenarios.

I have been skipping the story all together in my second playthrough which probably will remain unfinished as I am going to conquer as much of Yara by myself as I can. Already finished one zone, all the treasure hunts, side stories, checkpoints and facilities. Reading a bit more than I did first time around and paying more attention to details around the landscape. I just don´t want to start the story and watch the same people die again knowing I cant change things.

The weird thing is that I am actually having fun with just messing about, once I am done with all of Yara I guess I will crown myself a dictator ....

In the beginning it felt a bit weird killing females, had to remind myself it was just a game. To those claiming absurdity within the Farcry concept, f.ex. how a rooster takes on elite soldiers, that really doesn´t apply to the protective instinct which many males have. There is a reason why we don´t murder children in any game I know, my caveman instinct did throttle for a moment when I started to play Farcry 6, I didn´t feel comfortable killing women. After a couple of hours I reached a compromise which was to stop the machete kills, it´s too detailed and actually I stopped doing it for both sexes.

What´s the difference you may ask? Killing is killing? It´s just a game. It´s an individual threshold which we all have and I am not judging anyone for how they were brought up. I do believe in equal rights, I asked my better half about my "macho meter", she stated I could be a bit over protective at times but otherwise I am not much of an old fashioned gentleman. She earns more than I do and I am fine with that.

I did bring up children because the African continent probably has more child soldiers than most would like to know, should realism apply here as well? I think not. I use a sniper mostly and don´t think too much about it, yes, it´s just a game, but as I stated ... each of us have our limits to what we want depicted in a game.

You are doing your own thing in the starting island and overhear 2 soldiers engaging in idle chatter, you pop them or move on, but had you stayed longer one would say ;- Have you heard El Presidente is coming to inspect the troops at sunrise near "a location". You grab your sniper, find a good a good spot at the mentioned location and pop El Presidente (Has to be really difficult though)... game over. You then get some sort of small story of how things went down.

I actually like the current one but wouldn´t mind 4 or 5.

12 statues spread across a city which is difficult to traverse at will. Sometimes it puzzles me, the mind of a person who comes up with this crap. The mental approach has to be "watch our glorious city since we devs worked hard to make it". While this is semi-optional, "semi" because you do need leaders to cash in for those upgrades, it boggles my mind how someone in their sane mind comes up with this.

Even without any enemies, fully marked statues with immediate teleport to each statue, it would still be a horrible quest. Some things I just can´t comprehend. 2 or 3 ... okay, but 12?