Characters and story aren't really that important.
I think this is where people who prefer Far Cry 2,4 and Primal are going to stand out most.
I completely disagree. I think story, epecially narrative. Is vitally important to a game, especially one with long boring cut-scenes and set-pieces.
If story isn't that important then why did we have to sit through those long boring bits where we play as that ancestor bloke leaping around like an idiot?
The drug trips in 3 were way better. And the annoying spoiled white bread nobody slowly becoming a badass survivor by drugging himself to the eyeballs and going on killing sprees until he lost his sense of identity is way more interesting as a protaganist than "This guy's mom's dead and he's here to rest her ashes but there's a civil war and for some reason he's caught in the middle between 2 incredibly 2 diensional parts of the reisstance! Which does he pick!?" which is just.... well kinda nothing.
GeneralKenobi85 posted...
Far Cry 4 had better outposts and better weapons.
If you say so.
I couldn't tell the difference apart from the fact 4 was much much easier.
I mean I do agree with you that the story is better. As are the characters. And the drug trips too. But gameplay trumps all, so if a sequel is worse in less important areas, it doesn't particularly bother me. I wouldn't really say Far Cry 4 is significantly better anyway. Just beats out 3 by a little bit. ---
Ah, yes, the Negotiator: General Kenobi <sneaky beeping>