In reviewing this game I am put in a complicated position. On one hand, it is extremely easy to fall back on the low-hanging critiques that a million others have said: "It's the same game again," "it's too long," "it's another open world game," etc... Or, to pan the game by dint of the fact that it's a Ubisoft game, which is a correct reaction in my opinion.
The problem for me is that I kind of loved it.
Make no mistake, it's not "favorites" material, and in a lot of ways it follows the AAA tradition of pushing out grossly inflated games with serious pacing issues, and has the self-consciousness of many open-world games that are so anxious to direct players towards Content that the open world becomes a checklist: there is no exploration, there is heading to the next map marker. But to be honest I found it an improvement over previous games in many ways. There's clear artistic intent here, struggling to express itself through Ubisoft's famously terrible company culture, and if anything it makes me yearn for the version of this game made in an alternate universe by a bunch of Peruvian university students.
Some say the story is "bad," and while I do fall back on polemic and a little bit of ribaldry here, I do have the sense to measure that instinct with regards to people who disagree with me. That said, this view baffles me because while the story is nothing special it is quite literally miles above the standards of the series. The side characters are highly memorable (and there is no Hurk), the villain is more realistic and credible than Joseph Jesus or campy Pagan Min or widely beloved crank Vaas (and the other villain from 3 whom everyone forgets because he sucked.) I would even go so far as to say the story is kind of good. Maybe it's my current state of mind, but there's a kind of tragedy to the proceedings, a vibe of "doesn't it kind of suck that the world can be like this?" The fictional country of Yara is trapped in a cycle of violence and revolution, and killing the evil dictator and his cronies won't fix it. Compare series sacred cow Far Cry 3, which has more of an exploitation/action film vibe, and is wholly uninterested in any kind of complexity. Is that a bad thing? Not intrinsically. But Far Cry 6's portrayal of political, institutional, and international violence and privation, while far from radical, feels almost ballsy at times. This is what I meant when I said that thing about the Peruvian university students - this game feels like if Disco Elysium was a Bethesda joint, which given developments with ZA\UM may well become reality.
Do I recommend it? No. Am I just playing devil's advocate? Maybe somewhat. But I will say this: I didn't completely regret playing this one. For a Ubisoft game, that's practically an A+.
The problem for me is that I kind of loved it.
Make no mistake, it's not "favorites" material, and in a lot of ways it follows the AAA tradition of pushing out grossly inflated games with serious pacing issues, and has the self-consciousness of many open-world games that are so anxious to direct players towards Content that the open world becomes a checklist: there is no exploration, there is heading to the next map marker. But to be honest I found it an improvement over previous games in many ways. There's clear artistic intent here, struggling to express itself through Ubisoft's famously terrible company culture, and if anything it makes me yearn for the version of this game made in an alternate universe by a bunch of Peruvian university students.
Some say the story is "bad," and while I do fall back on polemic and a little bit of ribaldry here, I do have the sense to measure that instinct with regards to people who disagree with me. That said, this view baffles me because while the story is nothing special it is quite literally miles above the standards of the series. The side characters are highly memorable (and there is no Hurk), the villain is more realistic and credible than Joseph Jesus or campy Pagan Min or widely beloved crank Vaas (and the other villain from 3 whom everyone forgets because he sucked.) I would even go so far as to say the story is kind of good. Maybe it's my current state of mind, but there's a kind of tragedy to the proceedings, a vibe of "doesn't it kind of suck that the world can be like this?" The fictional country of Yara is trapped in a cycle of violence and revolution, and killing the evil dictator and his cronies won't fix it. Compare series sacred cow Far Cry 3, which has more of an exploitation/action film vibe, and is wholly uninterested in any kind of complexity. Is that a bad thing? Not intrinsically. But Far Cry 6's portrayal of political, institutional, and international violence and privation, while far from radical, feels almost ballsy at times. This is what I meant when I said that thing about the Peruvian university students - this game feels like if Disco Elysium was a Bethesda joint, which given developments with ZA\UM may well become reality.
Do I recommend it? No. Am I just playing devil's advocate? Maybe somewhat. But I will say this: I didn't completely regret playing this one. For a Ubisoft game, that's practically an A+.
Reviewed on May 30, 2023