I liked Far cry 1 more than either 2 or 3. It had a better story then either of those and the gameplay was tough as nails for a singleplayer game. I had loads of fun. Far cry 2 got so boring after 4 hours and had a CoD-like story without the cutscenes and it was stretched out to last the entire game. Far cry 3 was a lot more fun, but I still
For those who don't know, there's an issue of input lag when aiming, the aiming doesn't feel smooth as far cry 4 or 5, is not something that barely annoys when playing, is a big issue that really makes the game frustrating, it has nothing to do with the tv, is an issue of the game, also blood dragon has the same problem, totally not recommended. Far Cry 4 had more interesting side missions than three did, such as Shangri-La, Yogi and Reggie, and Mumu Chiffon. I love more characters in 4 than I do in 3. The only characters I love in 3 is Sam, Hoyt, and Earnhardt. I agree about no grappling hook and bait.5 is far better than 3, but 3 is very good, all told. 1. The abysmal interface of 3 has been mostly fixed in 5, after being 1/2 fixed in 4. I've seen better interfaces in 90s games than 3. 2. Villains in 5 are better than the comic-book caricature which was Vaas, or the nondescript Hoyt. 5 has 4 better villains with decent backstory and screen
Farcry4 is a great game but a lot different to both primal and 5 in terms of crafting and menu. Game play is great fun as with all of them. Loads of beauty and things to do. If it's on sale, buy it. Also keep an eye out for far cry 3 as I enjoyed that the more than the rest (it's a morrowind vs oblivion vs skyrim type scenario)
tOUY6yj.