Soapbox: Go Buy The Best Console Version Of Far Cry 3 While It's Cheap On Xbox

Vaas is still the best Far Cry villain of all time. I'm half way through Far Cry 6 but very tempted to drop it and go back to this.

I have the 360 version of blood dragon digital. Is this FPS boosted? I see the Xbox One version on sale a lot and wonder if it's worth picking that up?

We all love Vaas, there's no question there - but best game in the series?? I don't think so...for a start, there's no grapple, can't get up a moderately steep hill (even in a car/quad), no parachute/wing suit till about an hour before the end, Jason and friends are nothing but rich, entitled morons, and at times - even when you have the best possible gear/weapons - some parts of the game can feel incredibly cheap 🙂

The article doesn't specify the exact frame rate of the Xbox 360 version on Series S|X but I'm guessing it's 60fps. Well, I'll get that version, then 😊.

No argument that this could be the best version due to FPS boost. But the best game in the series? Hell no.

4 has everything 3 has, but adds elephants as rides! I even liked the second part more, because of the awesome fire physics and the overall more realistic feel. But 5 and 6 are objectively much better games from a gameplay perspective.

Not to mention Primal is probably in the Top Two of the best Far Cry titles (you're fighting mammoths with spears while riding a sabre tiger for gods sake). And Blood Dragon is just pure awesomeness from start to finish.

@Echtzeit @Sixor The only game I've played is Blood Dragon that was one of my first Games with Gold freebies. I am reading random users about the series (usually, more useful than reviews) and I can't make up my mind. I'm going to get 3 now but I wonder if I'd like the others. Some people say they are full of bad language and that 1 and 2 have aged poorly.

Ive got 1000GS on the 360 Version. Was a great time, but i dont need to replay it.

I got the remastered version for cheaper in a sale

I've never played a far cry ñ, maybe time to give a couple of them a try with this

I recently got all achievements on Far Cry 6 (including all DLC) and on Far Cry 3 “remaster”… I got to say I disagree with 3 being the best entry. I played 3 back in the day on PS3, it was a magnificent game for its time but it is just nowhere near as good as it’s sequels.

I understand the nostalgia appeal, and liking the world being smaller with fewer activities, but the game has simply gotten so much better on every single entry…

I do wish UBisoft went back and patched all Xbox one native entries to support 60fps on XS, though.

@Kaloudz Thanks; always up for a good suggestion. Kinda curious now, why is 5 a better entry point?

3 was the most important but I can’t say it’s the best — certainly not now. It took all of the lessons from 1 and 2 (and even offshoots like Instincts) and applied them for a game that took the series to a new level of success — especially on consoles. FC was poplar on PC but never found a big home on consoles until 3. But 4,5,6 and continually refined and perfected those mechanics, and spin-offs like Blood Dragon, New Dawn, and Primal put new and fun spins on them.

3 made the template for all future games and is responsible for the series being a sales juggernaut, and it’s worth the trip down nostalgia lane or for historical curiosity, but if you’re new I’d suggest checking out something 5 — which goes on sale often, has the modern mechanics and fidelity, and recently got a 60FPS patch. Heck, if you’re dying to play 3, most PCs can run it and you’d get both better fidelity and framerate together compared to the 360 port.

@Stamnoso I’m not @kaloudz but I’d say:

1) The setting and villains were interesting for the series, and the story was excellent and topical
2) It’s the right blend of the mechanics that FC3 introduced but with a more modern approach that Ubisoft spent years perfecting
3) It’s probably more welcoming to newcomers and just felt like a more a fresh start for the series
4) Its Arcade mode is still unbeatable — you can make your own missions or play a nearly limitless amount of them from others. They bring in elements from all the other FC games — and even other Ubisoft games — to make a sandbox that just doesn’t get old. I stormed Die Hard’s Nakotomi Plaza, infiltrated a ship of terrorists, and played a zombie horror game through the streets of NY.

For years it was on the Xbox FPS boost program but that made the game look shockingly awful; everyone avoided it. Recently Ubi just dropped their own 60fps patch across all platforms and it’s fantastic.

I thought Far Cry 6 was one of the best games of 2021. Plus, I picked up a disc copy at BJ's for $9.98 about a year ago. So the price was real good. Graphics were great, audio was great and gameplay/story was great. But I've never played FC3. Maybe I should give it a go for $5.99.

I much prefer far cry 2. 3 was ok 4 was awful

Personally I think the story for FC3 is highly overrated, yes, even Vaas. Great voice acting, but the story was not that great. Interestingly I feel it was way more fleshed out in the FC6 DLC.

The whole white-savior protagonist theme honestly had me eye rolling the whole time. So glad they went with native protagonist in all subsequent sequels.

The Far Cry 3 Classic Edition definitely is an improvement over the 360 version. It runs with native 2K and has more detail and draw distance. I would absolutely prefer that version over the 360 version.

@Nintendo4Sonic Damn, why don't they enhance it for Series S|X and make my choice easier? Is the Xbox 360 version 720p?

@EvenStephen7 and @Kaloudz thanks, great to hear to this, sounds really good. I've added primal to the list too and downloading far cry 5 now, will play it on the side with P4G.

@Banjo- there was a digital foundry video for this. The 360 version was below 720p.

@Nintendo4Sonic I found a Digital Foundry video that is one hour and a half long... I will watch... a bit.

Unquestionably the best in the series in my book. Sure, newer iterations have various improvements to game play, but game play is just one aspect of the game. This has the best story and antagonist hands down and I’ll take that with decent game play over a weaker story and antagonist with slightly better game play all day long.

If you’re speaking just to the game play and nothing else, this is not the best game in the series. When taking into account every aspect of the game, no other Far Cry title comes close, at least not for me.

@GalacticBreakdown what you're telling is definitely right. I kinda remember these words from Digital Foundry and I didn't say that the XBox One game is the best Remaster out there and yeah, it's just 30 fps.
But from what I saw, the 360 version took a lot of graphical hits back then.
I was ok with the Classic Edition and had a good time with that game.

@Banjo- the newer XBox One version has just 30 fps, if you can deal with that, the rest is fine.

@GalacticBreakdown The long video is really boring because they make silly jokes and talk about how things have evolved... I only watched a little bit while I was doing something else.

Thanks for the information and yes, 60fps is more important. I'll watch that other video and not buy the Classic Edition/remaster unless I get it as part of Far Cry 5, I didn't know that it was included in the DLC. Too bad that the Xbox 360 version was not enhanced for Xbox One X nor Series S|X but 720 at 60fps seems the better choice.

And yes, free backwards compatibility is amazing. Best thing about Xbox, especially when enhanced.

Now I remember that I got Assassin's Creed III remasters as part of Assassin's Creed Odyssey Gold Edition.

@TownYsend I did not know that Blood Dragon was on disc until I found one. I have been told that it is incredibly rare and does not have artwork or a manual/insert. So, I created them and had them printed on high quality paper. It looks exactly like an official Xbox 360 game.

@Banjo- I'm pretty sure that it has FPS boost. Actually I just checked and it definitely does. That's why it is preferable to the Xbox One version.

The most overrated game in the series. Still good for its time, kinda boring nowadays.
Worst protagonist, tho. And yeah, Vaas was really cool, but he isn't the main villain which means a chunk of the game we get the other guy (which I loved btw) but people tend to forget that.
4 did everything 3 did better, even the message.

Funny how often these modern "definitive classic" editions are worse.

Bought for 99p and reward points.

It is FPS boosted (to 60fps) on Series consoles.

Plays well, but be aware the resolution is pretty poor - sub 720P.

@themightyant Thanks! I bought Far cry 3 too yesterday, cause it was a good price for a game that many people seem to love, so at some point I'll give it a go too.

I can understand the Ubisoft style burnout, I had more or less the same after years of playing AC. I got tired after completing AC Unity. Since the, I haven't really played one of these despite having a couple more in PS plus and GP now, so it's been a while. Hopefully, will enjoy this one now.

@ZYDIO Yes, I know that it has FPS Boost (my first comment mentions 60fps) but that's not considered enhanced/optimised for Xbox One X nor Series S|X. It's great that it has FPS Boost but the resolution could have been upgraded, too. The Classic Edition (remaster) is meant to do that but it's 30fps on Series S|X.

@Banjo- I wonder why they chose to FPS boost the original and not the classic edition. Also if they would have just FPS boosted the original and upgraded the resolution it would probably be better than the classic edition. I have both of them and I almost started the classic edition until I heard that the original one got FPS boosted. Also I heard the classic edition has issues.

the xbox 1 version does not have coop missions like the 360 version. plus the coop missions are fun with the quick match, wish more shooters did this.

this is old info that may have changed. feel free to correct me.

@themightyant I am currently at 180 something hours on Valhalla and I still haven't touched the DLC yet, but I think I'm getting towards the end of the base game soon. It feels like it's wrapping up the story. I can't imagine how many hours I will have in it after I finish all of the DLC. I'm not even doing everything or trying to hundred percent anything either, I'm just playing through it and doing the mysteries and some of the other little things like collecting the treasures when I come across them.

@ZYDIO I agree. FPS Boost seems a very simple thing to do with modern games. The Classic Edition is a modern PC port so why didn't they boost it for Series S|X? Why is it 30fps on Series X? It's ridiculous. The PC version is 60fps and this is a PC port! Resolution is 900p on Xbox but it was upgraded to 1440p for Xbox One X:

https://youtu.be/LpdXKwlhpe0?t=406

By the way, I started Assassin's Creed II last evening, The Ezio Collection, on Series X. It also has FPS Boost (60fps). It looks awesome. I'm 99% sure that it's 1080p. The textures are very good. The only AC game I have played and beaten is I (a bit before it received FPS Boost) and I loved it. I want to play them in release order so the second game had to be next although I have most of them already, in Gold Edition.

They are a history lesson! I don't mean how the characters behave (that's not history and I don't care) but the files explaining the architecture, culture and so on. The stories are also based on historical events.

I’m split on the whole “drawn out/too long” sentiment. Although on the one hand I can understand appreciating a shorter game, I also have a hard time understanding criticizing a game for packing too much content.

If someone gets bored of a game play loop, ok, either the loop is not fun or not to one’s tastes. But otherwise, my biggest disappointment with Valhalla was finishing it. There been lots of DLC I still have to do that came out after I finished it, so might dive back into it at some point, but I love me a beefy content rich game that I have fun with and can dive 300+ hours into.

I’m curious why no one ever complains (that I heard of) about Breath of the Wild or Tears of the Kingdom being too long…

@Banjo- FPS Boost is anything but simple. It can trigger plenty of bugs, some of the games that have it enabled still allow players to disable it precisely due to edge cases were bugs prevent progress. I remember having some minor progress halting bugs playing Prey with FPS boost, and being forced to disable it a couple times to get through those sections.

At the end there are only two reasons for a game not to get the FPS boost treatment:

• Publisher refused due to plans for a future remaster, port, what not
• compatibility testing failing

Given UBisoft track record with these programs, I’m sure the issue was compatibility. I do hope at some point they do a pass through more of their XBOne Gen games and add native 60fps support the way they did with FC5.

@themightyant if you don’t like it, fair, but I really disagree that the amount of content feels at all like “live service”.

Mind you, their latest games have had some live service elements (daily quests that require being online and the skin shops) but they are entirely optional (and can’t even be played if you are offline thanks to quick resume, I never play that content.)

At the end it might alienate some players, but their sales don’t lie: every entry sells more than the previous one. The majority of the market loves the beefier games.

My one complaint about beefier and beefier games is they take longer and longer to make. I would 100% take shorter AC and FC games if that meant they came faster, even yearly.

@themightyant if I venture to take a guess:
A) Mirage started as even more DLC for Valhalla
B) They realized their next entry would take too long and figured a smaller game in between would help pad their books.

I dare bet still that Mirage will still be longer than any pre-Origins entry, though.

Honest question: what does “respect my time” even mean for a game? I seen that line before, but what does that even mean? A game is entertainment, so long as you having fun while playing, how is that time being disrespected?

@Tharsman The same reason no one complains about them being (at best) 900p 30fps.

@Tharsman "I’m curious why no one ever complains (that I heard of) about Breath of the Wild or Tears of the Kingdom being too long…"

Certainly you can see the difference between a systemic open world with emergent gameplay and handcrafted challenges on the one hand, and a smattering of copy-pasted outpost on a non-interactive stretch of land.

That's what kept me playing for 150+ hours in BOTW and has me bored after 15 hours with any Ubisoft game.

@clvr if you don’t notice the copy/paste shrine/korok stuff in BOTW, or somehow feel it’s less tedious to climb 15 towers in that game to reveal the map than it’s in AC, I then would chalk it to bias, or just the fact that, well as you said, you didn’t spend enough time in a UBsoft game.

I mean: complete this stone circle, move a metal box to match a box pattern, jump into circle of flowers in the water, clear camp to open a chest, etc etc, all these “custom challenge” are copy and pasted all over the map with minor adjustments.

For every actually unique shrine in the game, there are like 10 generic ones.

BOTW borrows so, so much from the UBisoft formula, and I’m saying this as someone that really likes BOTW, so this is not an attempt at dissing it.

@themightyant Polish aside (let’s face it, Zelda has more polish, but should be expected given they take 6 or more years between entries) the biggest difference is one of setting. Being fantasy focused, BOTW (and Elden Ring) get to hide progression systems behind exploration more organically. You find koroks or shrines that give you the currency needed to boost your stats and inventory. I don’t recall there being limited inventory space on the last AC games, and think they did away with it in FC 4 or 5.

Exploration would feel a lot more rewarding in FC/AC if that was the only way to boost your stats, but they instead focused on XP via kills and objective clears. Exploration ends up about finding new weapons, be it cosmetics or slight variants. It’s rarely about “better weapons”.

The fantasy setting also allows for a lot more biome diversity. There is some diversity in AC and FC, but it’s never as drastic as frozen tundra, volcano cavern, arid dunes and deep jungles all existing side by side as it’s the norm in fantasy.

As for “go to the marker”, at least AC no longer shows you a map full of markers by default. They do allow the player to turn classic markers on. I’m curious if they will ever stop offering that option, in one hand the forced exploration can feel immersive, but the markers can be seen as a huge accessibility feature.

There is something to be said about shrines feeling a bit more like dungeons, not as long as Skyrim ones but still a distraction from the over-world. That’s something I would like to see explored in future UB games, indoor maps that help distract from the eternal open world.

@themightyant I feel UBisoft has 3 strong open world setting pillars between AC, FC and Watchdogs (hope that series is not dead) historical/wilderness/urban settings. A fantasy setting would mean a brand new IP, and selling a new IP is hard. Immortals could become that if they give it another chance.

@Tharsman as @themightyant rightly suggests, Zelda is way more sophisticated in its approach, even if some of those thousands pieces of content are not all unique.
For one, the ways in which you can interact with the environment make every challenge sort of new, as there isn't just one solution intended by the Devs.
Secondly, Zelda takes a "world first" approach, while Ubi games are "map first", in the sense that yes, both feature towers to climb, but only the latter tells you where anything and everything of interest is.
In Zelda you must find stuff on your own and are guided by your curiosity (which is always rewarded), making even reaching a mountaintop (or a Shrine, or a tower, etc.) a challenge in and of itself: do I have enough stamina? Should I climb or go the other way around? Are there enemies?
And with TOTK, things have become exponentially more complex and sophisticated, giving player the chance to MacGyver up any solutions you might think.

So yeah, I think these 2 Zelda games are absolutely in a league of their own, and no Ubi open world game can even think of coming close.
The former are a gourmet meal, the latter is comfort food. Tasty and likeable all you want, but not really high quality or nutritious.

@clvr I'm with you, I enjoyed BOTW and TOTK even more so but AC Valhalla was just so badly designed and I got bored of its world pretty quickly. In Zelda there are meaningful and enjoyable puzzles of varying degrees of difficulty pretty much everywhere you go. In AC every area just feels disposable and not really important at all, there are some good ideas in those games but they get lost as Ubisoft throws everything at it and hopes something sticks.

In Zelda I feel constantly rewarded, where as a Ubisoft open world just makes me want to turn it off

What resolution did the 360 version run at as I'm guessing this has FPS boost only.

Far Cry 3 is one of the worst games I have ever played - because of the fact that FC 2 was one of the best and they ruined it with bad writing ,characters and gameplay. The series has never been the same since they listened to hack "writers" and changed the perfect FC2 formula.

Avoid. Play FC2 - an absolute classic. One of a tiny handful of video games ever made that has good writing. I am talking good like as good as a decent novel not typical game garbage.

I picked up a used copy at Gamexchange for $5.00. I like the game a lot. About four hours in. The only issue I have is that my character dies very easily which is a bit annoying. Very good game otherwise.