far cry on wii is CRAP!!!

Taking noobs to school
Rep: 44



Joined: 21 Jun 2006
Posts: 16,053
OFFLINE

IGN Ratings for Far Cry Vengeance (Wii)
Rating Description
out of 10 click here for ratings guide
3.0 Presentation
What a disaster. Terrible cut-scenes and graphics and the omission of an online multiplayer mode and map editor.
4.0 Graphics
Yuck. What happened to gorgeous Far Cry? This doesn’t even look half as good as the year-old Xbox version.
3.0 Sound
Solid voice acting during cut-scenes, but audio cuts in and out while playing and the music is oftentimes nonexistent.
7.0 Gameplay
A fundamentally fun shooter and most of the new Wii controls feel great. But not all the control additions are welcomed and the title is glitchy.
6.0 Lasting Appeal
A decent single-player romp and a throwaway multiplayer mode. No online play and no map editor.
4.0
Poor OVERALL
(out of 10 / not an average)

Agent of Chaos
Rep: 57



Joined: 10 Aug 2005
Posts: 40,588
OFFLINE

All of them opinions. Play it yourself first then make judgement.

Taking noobs to school
Rep: 44



Joined: 21 Jun 2006
Posts: 16,053
OFFLINE

i did duh

Agent of Chaos
Rep: 57



Joined: 10 Aug 2005
Posts: 40,588
OFFLINE

Then why did you post IGN’s ratings. Why not make your own. I don’t care if their better or worse but at least give your own opinion.

The drummer
Rep: 19



Joined: 20 Aug 2005
Posts: 14,618
OFFLINE

I played it and it was gay I give it a 3 1/2 out of 10. You can tell Ubisoft rushed it. The graphics are insanely bad, the control sucks, the camera angle is horrable. Pass this game up.

M  v  C   Graphics Designer
Rep: 14



Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 8,080
OFFLINE

the game on wii is shit, if crysis or whoeva make wonderfully good looking games then why d hell couldnt they make it look good on the wii, o wait, the wiis graphical power has been maxed out and it dont even look at good as xbox

Regular
Rep: 0



Joined: 22 Dec 2006
Posts: 275
OFFLINE

its not wiis max graphical power, its probably the worst the wii has. its got udisoft major rushing. the wiis beginning graphics are ZTP or SSBB. those are about 3/4 of wiis graphical power.

M  v  C   Graphics Designer
Rep: 14



Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 8,080
OFFLINE

3/4 far out the wii is weak

Agent of Chaos
Rep: 57



Joined: 10 Aug 2005
Posts: 40,588
OFFLINE

No one knows how much in Wii games has been used. I’d say that hardly any has really been used “efficiently” yet. The Wii can outdo the Gamecube and the Xbox. So watch the Rebirth movie and you know the Wii can out do that.

UBER 1337 Poster
Rep: 16



Joined: 29 May 2006
Posts: 4,355
OFFLINE

Besides P.moore these is somthing you should know two big reasons,

Far cry started to go down soon after the 3rd game.

Crysis is using the far cry engine 2 note why that is because you can do so much of the same stuff.

The drummer
Rep: 19



Joined: 20 Aug 2005
Posts: 14,618
OFFLINE

Oh really

UBER 1337 Poster
Rep: 2



Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 1,600
OFFLINE

Far Cry for the Wii is pretty horrible. The general game design just blows. Graphics seem below PS2 par, and the audio tracks are just simply missing throught half of the game. The controls work ok, but aren’t solid throughout the game (COD3 handles better). The multiplayer has almost no features or customization options, and the lack of online modes is depressing. I really hate to play games of such poor quality. I give it a 4/10.

Far Cry on Wii really does not demonstrate what the Wii is capable of. The graphical power of the Wii has yet to be displayed; even titles like LoZ:TP (which I don’t think looked that great) don’t really showcase it. The Wii has a GPU more powerful than Xbox, which delivered gorgeous titles like Chaos Theory and Halo 2. The Wii, like all consoles at launch, just needs time for developers to figure out the system.

Last edited 02 Jan 2007 02:27 pm by Brain

Scriptor of Alacritas
Rep: 66



Joined: 13 Nov 2006
Posts: 19,835
OFFLINE

What about the PS2? Hmm i think the wii graphics will improve to a standard just higher than the best graphical PS2 games like Yakuza and Shadow of the Collusus but not higher. But those games looked almost next gen so that is a good goal for the wii.

UBER 1337 Poster
Rep: 2



Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 1,600
OFFLINE

1. Those games didn’t look next-gen

2. Wii has the capabilities to surpass the graphical limits of all last-gen. systems (which is still pretty good considering games like Chaos Theory). Compared to the 360 and PS3, however, Wii’s graphics will never truly look next-gen. But, I don’t think anyone is buying a Wii for mind-blowing visuals in the first place, so it’s kind of a moot point.

Agent of Chaos
Rep: 57



Joined: 10 Aug 2005
Posts: 40,588
OFFLINE

There is not last gen game that was as graphically amazing as Resident Evil 4 on the GC. The PS2 version didn’t even stack up to it. RE4 is really the only title that shows a thin line between current gen and last gen.

Scriptor of Alacritas
Rep: 66



Joined: 13 Nov 2006
Posts: 19,835
OFFLINE

The PS2 version had the lightning gun you cannot top that!

M  v  C   Graphics Designer
Rep: 14



Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 8,080
OFFLINE

why d fuck do wii games look so crap if ps3 and 360 games luked far beta! surely one company would put the effort into making a game luk decent and not a shithole, zelda is the only decent luking game and it could be played on the ps2, it had midi quality music! and has extremly low textured areas, the only thing that luks gud bout it is the water and lighting which can be performed on the ps2

UBER 1337 Poster
Rep: 23



Joined: 26 Aug 2005
Posts: 4,974
OFFLINE

I think Zelda looks better than RE4. I think Shadow of the Colossus is more impressive than RE4, but it had HORRIBLE textures. It really only had awesome lighting. Besides, it also ran 30 fps max, many times FAR LOWER, especially on the last colossus. RE4 really only had such high polygon counts (which, in fact, got close to its theoretical maximum) and great character rendering. Some decent lighting was in there, and good explosive effects, but nothing really special.

Zelda has very good lighting for a last gen game (felt very natural, considering it was merely bloom), decent textures (better than RE4’s), a massive world, nice environmental effects (such as the lights beaming through the windows in the Temple of Time), pretty (but cartoony) water, and some cool magical effects (on par with FFXII, which so far has the BEST magical effects I have seen last gen). Not only that, it runs a solid 60 fps and short load times (in Hyrule fields, there are very few load times).

Looking at Super Mario Galaxies, we’re seeing higher polygon counts, better shaders, better lighting, and finally texture depth techniques such as bump maps (these were used rarely on the GCN, only in games such as Rogue Squadron and RE4). Its overall a good looking, early game on the Wii. Its not on Gears of War’s level, definitely, but it shows good potential. Not only that, those planets fill the skies, so there seems to be a pretty large world to run around. And, as seems common for Nintendo, the animation is top-notch. The Wii won’t look bad, but if you want GoW or Killzone, you won’t get that any time soon, if at all.

As for FarCry, its supposed to have many technical problems that make it a game that’s not worth playing, considering we’ve played better looking, and better running, versions of it on a weaker system.

Last edited 02 Jan 2007 07:04 pm by RageOverdose