Ubisoft recycled Far Cry 4’s maps in Far Cry Primal

[natr0n]

"The easiest way to spot similarities between the two maps is to compare water reservoirs and rivers. Based on that, you can assume that the developers at Ubisoft took Kyrat from Far Cry 4, made it a little smaller and then modified it a bit, in hopes that we would not notice what was going on."

FC4

FCP

http://www.gamepressure.com/e.asp?ID=563

 

[manofthem]

Any chance this is intentional, as in the same geographic place back in the day?

 

[natr0n]

Any chance this is intentional, as in the same geographic place back in the day?

While that could be used as an excuse by the devs they never clearly stated this in any promo materials.

 

[manofthem]

While that could be used as an excuse by the devs they never clearly stated this in any promo materials.

You're probably right, just a shortcut to save time/money.

 

[Guitar]

I mean...they didn't hide it did they? I find myself not caring. I didn't explore barely any of Far Cry 4's map...and if they made it seem like a different environment, who cares? Plus you're not in vehicles anyways, so it's a different experience in theory.

 

[Finners]

Heres the animated image for better comparison, From what I read far cry 4 was set in the Himalayas and Farcry primal is supposed to be set in central Europe so re-using the map because of location doesn't make sense.

 

[xorbe]

I don't care, but not paying $60 for this re-spin either (waiting for sale, will play it eventually.)

 

[Frag_Maniac]

It's Ubisoft, nothing would surprise me. Just the fact that they fooled all their fans into believing voting on their survey of settings/scenarios was an actual thing should make it obvious (if it wasn't already by now), that they don't give a damn about our opinions. This game isn't even remotely close to anything on that survey.

Ubi are like MS, they ask opinions just to pretend they care, then do what they want regardless. They're only interested in the quickest, cheapest way to make money. They seem to think they can lull us like the taming feature in this game.

 

[Flogger23m]

The overall layout might be similar to re-emphasize core gameplay mechanics which carried over from FC4. It does not matter much as long as the details are altered. Aside from the lakes on the edge of the map which are likely hardly seen I don't think anyone would notice. Reusing assets is common in games. This is often done to save time, money and prevent redoing all of the systems that no one sees but are a pain to make. Typically the systems are built upon for a few games and maybe used in other series. But in general, building a game and then redoing the sequel from scratch is rare because it isn't very practical. Especially for more niche games.

 

[Vayra86]

The overall layout might be similar to re-emphasize core gameplay mechanics which carried over from FC4. It does not matter much as long as the details are altered. Aside from the lakes on the edge of the map which are likely hardly seen I don't think anyone would notice. Reusing assets is common in games. This is often done to save time, money and prevent redoing all of the systems that no one sees but are a pain to make. Typically the systems are built upon for a few games and maybe used in other series. But in general, building a game and then redoing the sequel from scratch is rare because it isn't very practical. Especially for more niche games.

Ahem. Sorry to stop you here, but that does NOT go for the in-game map geography of an *entire* game. Name me one other game sequel that did this (and markets it as a different area altogether!). I had to read your comment twice, are you seriously defending Ubisoft here for this?

You copy over game mechanics, animation sets and generic assets yes. If you copy more than that, they call it 'a reskin'. Far Cry has been reskinning since FC3, and now they simply didn't even bother building a new game world, ie they just skipped LEVEL DESIGN.

They should have marketed this game as 'Buy a FC4 rehash with half the original game world at full price! You get bows, spears, and your own house cat for free'

What's next, Watch Dogs 2 on a tropical island? FCP is now officially a lesser version of every part that preceded it. Hell its even less than Blood Dragon. You've got about three gameplay options (shoot bow, send pet, run away) and half the already visited game map. Wow Ubisoft, just wow.

I'm not even pirating this junk, waste of bandwidth. I guess this is how Ubisoft puts the final stop to piracy, they just release shit no one wants to get.

 

[Athlon2K15]

nobody gives a fuck /thread

 

[rtwjunkie]

Any chance this is intentional, as in the same geographic place back in the day?

Well, FC4 is in the Himalayas, and FC Primal in Central Europe. I suppose by "Central Europe" they might get away with saying Central Europe is the Alps. That would account for mountains. I guess?

 

[Eric_Cartman]

It doesn't matter, it looks completely different in the game.

No one would have even noticed if it wasn't for the ability to view the entire map at once.

 

[manofthem]

Well, FC4 is in the Himalayas, and FC Primal in Central Europe. I suppose by "Central Europe" they might get away with saying Central Europe is the Alps. That would account for mountains. I guess?

Perhaps, but I guess it really doesn't matter. To me, it's not a big deal and not a deal breaker. I'll be getting this game eventually and won't really care too much about the lay of the land

 

[trog100]

it dosnt matter.. it is an entirely different experience.. i havnt played it enough to form a a real opinion yet but i can say same basic map or not it looks and feels very different from kryat..

i was surprised how small a download it was.. just over 12 gig.. it has also been suggested it was first thought of as an add on like the valley of the yeti and then turned into a full game release.. but if i enjoy playing it i dont care how it was done..

trog

 

[RCoon]

People discover the developers of a game that is largely created with the same assets have used the same assets in their new title. Look at everything from far cry 3 and all the latest assassins creed titles. Ubi recycle anything they can get away with.

It's been this way for years.

 

[Guitar]

Look at Valve titles if you want to talk about reusing assets from their other games...I mean come on. This is nothing new.

 

[AsRock]

It's Ubisoft, nothing would surprise me. Just the fact that they fooled all their fans into believing voting on their survey of settings/scenarios was an actual thing should make it obvious (if it wasn't already by now), that they don't give a damn about our opinions. This game isn't even remotely close to anything on that survey.

Ubi are like MS, they ask opinions just to pretend they care, then do what they want regardless. They're only interested in the quickest, cheapest way to make money. They seem to think they can lull us like the taming feature in this game.

Well they been doing that since Ghost Recon when they screwed the whole community over with GRAW and what ever else followed, funny part is FC 2\3\4 are closer than any game replace Ghost Recon with.

They not going to give users the control like they did with Ghost Recon it's not good business.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

Far Cry has been reskinning since FC3, and now they simply didn't even bother building a new game world, ie they just skipped LEVEL DESIGN.

Exactly this, thank you for summing it up well. Bits and pieces are one thing, but when you skip structuring an entirely new game world, and instead just reskin the previous one, that is a step way too far. Especially since the gameplay is so simplistic to begin with. I mean who cares about a game with bow, club, and spear, and tons of variations of each? It's the height of lazy development, and an obvious cash grab attempt. I imagine their concept artists must be real happy only having to have a few meshes of objects that they bedazzle various ways.

 

[Flogger23m]

Ahem. Sorry to stop you here, but that does NOT go for the in-game map geography of an *entire* game. Name me one other game sequel that did this (and markets it as a different area altogether!). I had to read your comment twice, are you seriously defending Ubisoft here for this?

You copy over game mechanics, animation sets and generic assets yes. If you copy more than that, they call it 'a reskin'. Far Cry has been reskinning since FC3, and now they simply didn't even bother building a new game world, ie they just skipped LEVEL DESIGN.

They should have marketed this game as 'Buy a FC4 rehash with half the original game world at full price! You get bows, spears, and your own house cat for free'

What's next, Watch Dogs 2 on a tropical island? FCP is now officially a lesser version of every part that preceded it. Hell its even less than Blood Dragon. You've got about three gameplay options (shoot bow, send pet, run away) and half the already visited game map. Wow Ubisoft, just wow.

I'm not even pirating this junk, waste of bandwidth. I guess this is how Ubisoft puts the final stop to piracy, they just release shit no one wants to get.

You keep throwing around the term "re-skinning" and I doubt you know what it even means. The maps shown in the pictures are altered. The rivers aren't even the same, never mind the massive geographical differences. And I am doubting the old out post, props and assets are reused. Maybe some of the grass and flowers and whatnot are reused, but I am sure some new assets are mixed in. The pictures don't even show the actual terrian height or placement, just a 2D top down overview. If you can post a screen shot showing the exact same area in both games you'd have a point.

 

[Vayra86]

You keep throwing around the term "re-skinning" and I doubt you know what it even means. The maps shown in the pictures are altered. The rivers aren't even the same, never mind the massive geographical differences. And I am doubting the old out post, props and assets are reused. Maybe some of the grass and flowers and whatnot are reused, but I am sure some new assets are mixed in. The pictures don't even show the actual terrian height or placement, just a 2D top down overview. If you can post a screen shot showing the exact same area in both games you'd have a point.

In fact about 80% of the assets are direct copies, that goes all the way through to every little generic prop and even the whole set of sound effects that comes with the game. The biggest addition that makes 'it all look different' is an overly present color toning, where Kyrat used colder/blueish hues, Primal goes into warmer/yellow/reddish hues. That is IT. They just ported over Shangri-La colors, including the cat.

They want to convey a new setting in a different age and they re-use the stuff you've been using in the present for a few games now. The fact of the matter is, Primal is less of everything, and in return you get some Tamagotchi/Pokemon mix of capturing animals.

I know very well developers re-use assets all the time. But to do it this blatantly while offering absolutely zero new gameplay and just expanding on a few measly context-sensitive buttons to do literally everything in the game... that is just poverty. Pure poverty.

If they sold Primal at 15-20 bucks I'd get it, but they ask full retail for it.

But everyone is invited to get ripped off, play it and after a few outposts you'll know you wasted your money, and might just as well re-play any previous Far Cry because it offers far more of a sandbox than Primal ever can.

I mean come on, it's all really, really obvious. If you like your gameplay repetitive and rehashed until infinity, by all means, but releases like this are miles away from quality gaming. Far Cry is rapidly going the Assassins Creed route. It's lazy, and it goes to show that Ubisoft has learned absolutely nothing from the past few years.

 

[Flogger23m]

I'd say the biggest difference is probably the map. The general layout is the same, but it is rather different. Take the two valleys on the bottom of the map that don't even exist in FC4. I have little to no interest in the game due to the theme. I'd like them to go back and do a re-attempt of Far Cry 2 without the juvenile theme of FC3/4. The story in FC2 was rather lacking and it didn't do the theme justice. They can set it in the late 70s-80s and roughly base it on the various conflicts in which mercenaries participated. It would be a unique theme for video games and breathe some fresh air into Far Cry at the same time.

 

[trog100]

if i didnt read somewhere the game uses the kryat map i for sure would not know.. scenery wise everything looks very different..

as for value for money.. that will soon sort itself out.. people will ether buy the game at its current price or they wont.. if they dont the price will soon drop..

as for repetitive game play.. it seems the same in all games.. the key thing is.. do you enjoy doing what the game offers or not..

i have three games on the go at the moment.. just cause 3.. its repetitive but i just enjoy blowing the crap out everything in sight and the total explosive chaos the game offers..

fall out 4.. its repetitive and open world .. but i dont really like constantly looking for things and poking about buildings all the time.. its a game i cant really get in to.. i feel the same about witcher.. a game i cant really get into..

far cry primal.. its repetitive.. i am still making my mind up with it.. playing the caveman may drag me in it may not.. is it worth the money.. probably not but maybe fall out 4 wasnt ether..

mad max was repetitive.. but its a game i enjoyed playing..

trog

 

[Vayra86]

I'd say the biggest difference is probably the map. The general layout is the same, but it is rather different. Take the two valleys on the bottom of the map that don't even exist in FC4. I have little to no interest in the game due to the theme. I'd like them to go back and do a re-attempt of Far Cry 2 without the juvenile theme of FC3/4. The story in FC2 was rather lacking and it didn't do the theme justice. They can set it in the late 70s-80s and roughly base it on the various conflicts in which mercenaries participated. It would be a unique theme for video games and breathe some fresh air into Far Cry at the same time.

That would honestly be a very good idea, (remnants of the) cold war era is very good for these no-name conflict situations

FC2 imo had the best atmosphere still of all of them. The way they conveyed Africa was brilliant, I felt like it had way more soul than FC3 and especially 4. Stealth also was done a lot better, hiding in the bushes was still a thing there. FC2 did still struggle with a lot of the concepts like outposts and guard posts that kept respawning momentarily after passing them by... and the malaria that popped up could have also been paced a little better, but that idea itself was pretty neat, it gave some sort of urgency to progression. Also, to have guns jamming and actually turning rusty was a great gameplay element.

The map also felt a bit bigger, more interesting, even though there was far less to do. The vistas for example were breathtaking. Now that I think of it, FC2 in my mind succeeded just as well in terms of the graphics as it was on the PS3, compared to how it looks now. Less is more, I think, back then we didn't have too much in terms of motion blur, DoF and all that other junk (the color filtering in FC4 and Primal is fucking hideous) that blurs the actually cheap graphical/artistic design.

 

[Flogger23m]

That would honestly be a very good idea, (remnants of the) cold war era is very good for these no-name conflict situations

FC2 imo had the best atmosphere still of all of them. The way they conveyed Africa was brilliant, I felt like it had way more soul than FC3 and especially 4. Stealth also was done a lot better, hiding in the bushes was still a thing there. FC2 did still struggle with a lot of the concepts like outposts and guard posts that kept respawning momentarily after passing them by... and the malaria that popped up could have also been paced a little better, but that idea itself was pretty neat, it gave some sort of urgency to progression. Also, to have guns jamming and actually turning rusty was a great gameplay element.

The map also felt a bit bigger, more interesting, even though there was far less to do. The vistas for example were breathtaking. Now that I think of it, FC2 in my mind succeeded just as well in terms of the graphics as it was on the PS3, compared to how it looks now. Less is more, I think, back then we didn't have too much in terms of motion blur, DoF and all that other junk (the color filtering in FC4 and Primal is fucking hideous) that blurs the actually cheap graphical/artistic design.

It certainly had flaws, but I considered it one of the better games of its time. The flamethrower and mortar with marking rounds were fun. I'd like them to revisit that theme and as I mentioned follow the Cold War / mercenary theme closer. FC3/4 were fun but that style/theme is getting a bit worn out. I'd like to see them change up the side activities to. The hunting and making holsters and whatnot out of animals was always silly but it worked for FC3/4. It would get old if they did it yet again, which seems to be the case in Primal.

I'd like them to introduce magazines which you must buy/find in addition to the ammo. No more pools of ammo. So if you're running low on M16 mags but have a bunch of AK mags you might have to use an AK for a bit until you get some more mags/ammo for your preferred weapon. Adds to the mercenary using what they find in the field theme. Maybe scavenge for vehicles and mounted MGs to assault opposing compounds or something. I'd just like to get away from the plants/animal gathering mechanic, which is reused in many games these days. MGSV, FC3/4/P, Assassins Creed, you name it.