From Breath of the Wild to Watch Dogs 2, we’re seeing a boom in so-called “systemic games”. What does that mean, how do they work, and what makes them tick?
Support Game Maker's Toolkit on Patreon - https://www.patreon.com/GameMakersToolkit
Aleissia Laidacker - Systems Are Everywhere | GCAP 2016
Raphael Colantonio, Harvey Smith - Empowering the Player in a Story-Rich World | GDC 2013
Why Dwarf Fortress started killing cats - Here's A Thing | Eurogamer
The uncertain future of games like Deus Ex and Dishonored | PC Gamer
Find Out More
Nels Anderson - How Systems Will Save Us All! | Full Indie 2014
Harvey Smith, Randy Smith - Would the Real Emergent Gameplay Please Stand Up? | GDC 2004
Nintendo - Breaking Conventions with The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild | GDC 2017
[ZIP] Clint Hocking - Designing to Promote Intentional Play | GDC 2006
What Works and Why Emergence | Rock Paper Shotgun
Nick Popovich - A Thousand Tiny Tales: Emergent Storytelling in Slime Rancher | GDC 2017
Mike Sellers - A Systemic Approach to Systemic Design | Sweden Game Arena 2015
Games shown in this episode (in order of appearance)
The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild (Nintendo, 2017)
Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain (Kojima Productions, 2015)
Kingdom Come: Deliverance (Warhorse Studios, 2018)
Mark of the Ninja (Klei Entertainment, 2012)
Watch Dogs 2 (Ubisoft Montreal, 2016)
Far Cry 4 (Ubisoft Montreal, 2014)
Monster Hunter: World (Capcom, 2018)
Spelunky (Derek Yu, 2012)
SteamWorld Dig 2 (Image and Form, 2017)
Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception (Naughty Dog, 2011)
Red Dead Redemption (Rockstar San Diego, 2010)
Assassin's Creed: Origins (Ubisoft Montreal, 2017)
Grand Theft Auto V (Rockstar North, 2013)
Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor (Monolith Productions, 2014)
Call of Duty: WWII (Sledgehammer Games, 2017)
Prey (Arkane Studios, 2017)
Hitman (iO Interactive, 2016)
Dishonored 2 (Arkane Studios, 2016)
Deus Ex (Ion Storm, 2000)
The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword (Nintendo, 2011)
Rain World (Videocult, 2017)
Dishonored: Death of the Outsider (Arkane Studios, 2017)
Far Cry 2 (Ubisoft Montreal, 2008)
Mafia III (Hangar 13, 2016)
SimCity (Maxis, 1989)
The Sims (Maxis, 2000)
RimWorld (Ludeon Studios, 2013)
Dwarf Fortress (Tam and Zach Adams, 2006)
Thief: The Dark Project (Looking Glass Studios, 1998)
System Shock 2 (Looking Glass Studios, 1999)
Gunpoint (Suspicious Developments, 2013)
Music used in this episode
Please, Don't Touch Anything OST, blinch
k. Part 2 - 01 untitled 1, animeistrash
The Sims 1: Gameplay #1 (No Commentary) | sibaem
METAL GEAR SOLID V: THE PHANTOM PAIN Decoys Confuse Guard | rcua1884
Zelda: BOTW (Fire In The Hole) | Nassi
Piggybacking off @Kamran Houle's comment, from my experience the three monsters in any zone patrol a set of areas with some overlap, and by normal means the monsters don't occupy the same area. It's only when the player engages an enemy that they stay in one area potentially long enough for the two monsters to meet and interact with each other. This actually gives the player a breather to heal or prepare traps, which I think is a conscious decision by the developers now that the series is a true open world as opposed to the earlier titles.
I don't think you "abused" the tranquilizer I think you just "used" the tranquilizer gun. Tranquilizer gun is and has always been Snake's primary weapon. I think the balance is if you want to do things quickly you kill everyone but if you want to do things safely use tranquilizer. It's a fine balance because that's what people expect. If the game was easier if you just ran around killing everyone it would break thematically a bit. They also have mechanics where the AIs start wearing helmets. You most certainly spent some of your resources preventing shipments of helmets, you have to if you want to use the tranquilizer through the whole game. You got invested into that gameplay style, to me it's mastefully intentional.
Prey sold so shitty, because it was marketed to the wrong audiance. Prey was in reality System Shock 3, not a dumb shooter game like the original Prey. So it sucked balls to the shooter audiance. It was in my personal opinion Game of the year ... after buying it much, much later on a deep sale.
BotW's system is fucking pathetic and I have no idea why everyone is so in love with it. Fire burns wood? No it doesn't. It burns a very small amount of wooden items that Nintendo absolutely planned to be burned, in a way that is equally as simple as adding an enemy that can be hit with a sword. Why can't trees and forests be burnt? Why can't moblin fortresses be burnt? Why can't ANYTHING in an npc village be burnt? Oh, you can chop things down? No you can't. You can chop trees. End of story. How fun would it have been to sneak under a tree fortress and chop down one of the supports (or set fire to it) and watch the whole thing collapse with enemies sliding and falling off. Every single video demonstrating all the 'amazing' 'unplanned' 'emergent' gameplay in BotW shows the exact same set of things, to the point where it becomes identical to people showing off a heavily scripted set piece from CoD or Uncharted. The most impressive thing Nintendo did in BotW was to convince players that yet another video of somebody flinging themselves around on a boulder is worthy of anyone's time. The BotW physics engine is fake bullshit.
EDIT: I fully confess that I don't finish watching videos, and comment on thing as I hear them. That way my thoughts won't be forgotten and I don't forget what the video says, word for word. So at 10:50 when Mark Brown talks about simulation games using this for decades, I agree, but I'm prematurely saying: so much more than sim games.
Uh... uh... the assumption amongst non-developer gamers (consumers) that non-systemic games are the paradigm is somewhat misleading and confusing.
Your title suggests by logical default (not using my system of definitions) that non-systemic designed games are, what, cinematic or scripted, and that they are the paradigm? I have a lot to say on that, and so do developers. (In a nutshell: they are NOT the paradigm).
Also, I don't define systemic the way that employee in your video does. I define systemic design as centered around the core gameplay loop (and the interplay off that and branching systems) -- so, every game ever made. Even the most retro game was complex (and I'm using the word strictly here, meaning, "multivariate and integrated", and not synonymous with "complicated" or "intricate."), and it is that complexity that hallmarks systemic-ness.
In any case, you can thank Todd Howard and the teams at R* for helping to bring the meteoric "rise" of "systemic" games. So I wouldn't say it has been the last few years, I'd say it's been around ten.
The terminology is used by a lot of the developers behind the games that have that kind of inter connectivity so for them systemic means there's a connection with all the systems in the game. It's possible he means the interconnection wasn't really a major focus like simulation games like Sim City and all that. Story Driven and Linear games are now starting to take advantage of that inter connectivity like Uncharted with its wide linear approach and obviously Dishonored and Prey who had help from creators of Deus Ex and Thief for that matter.
Weapons breaking in Breath of the Wild was anything but good. That was the only thing holding that game back imo. One of the things that made me fall in love with Zelda as a kid was when I went through a dungeon and found some new item or weapon, I got to keep that item, it didn't feel like a cheap throw-away power up. In BOTW getting new stuff feels like trash collection, nothing sucks more than micromanaging an inventory with whats least useful..
In MGS V I put in 300 hours and used everything, replayed every fun mission over and over seeing how fast or stealthy or lethal I could run it and still pull off an S rank, in a game like BOTW I hardly use anything because it's just gonna break so I just end up saving the better stuff I find until its trash, That's the opposite of enjoying a game for me, Instead of littering the game with thousands of trash Items they should have kept it that part like the old Zelda games. That game mechanic needs to stick to survival games.
You show an example of systemic gameplay in Watch Dogs 2 where you pit the cops against the gang members to escape and then show GTAV as an example of just "shooting a bunch of cops", but GTAV lets you do the exact same thing. In fact when escaping the cops with 1 or 2 stars in the ghetto areas of GTAV that's me preferred method of distraction while I switch cars and get outta there. Just saying.
In FarCry I had just fought tooth and nail to save some dude from a bunch of assholes. After it was over I was walking up to him to get my reward and he was all like "you saved my life man" when right out of nowhere my vision is filled with rhino ass as it steamrolled into him, killing him instantly. I had no clue that thing was even in the area, and it scared the absolute shit out of me. All I could do was yell "oh fuck!" and hightail it out of there. Fuck horror games, nothing has brought me closer to a real life heart attack than FarCry's unexpected animal encounters.
I think it'd be cool to have lots of systems like this and then add a magic system that lets you alter it, say:
Create a fire that doesn't get extinguished, prevent wood from burning or make metal and stone burn, create rain or snow or summoning monsters to attack dudes etc
Ive actually got a really funny story from that had nothing to do with me.
I was trying to solve a puzzle and i saw a thunderstorm coming so i dequiped my metal items. When the storm came i still heard the sparks of incoming lightning and I tried to figure out why i had metal. when the lighting hit it stuck near me and i heard a yell. I looked at the spot and saw a yiga swordmaster die
Great video Mark! At 6:10 you talk about how different entities interact with one another based on established rules in the game, however that instead of hard coding specific interactions for every different possible entity that is encountered, developers should instead program entities to react to general stimuli. This is the core idea behind class inheritance in object oriented programming. You program interactions between classes of objects instead of having to program an interaction for every instance of an object. It's cool to see such a fun application of this idea!
It would be interesting to see a game designed around these interactions between entities, instead of coming up with a narrative and player mechanics first. You set up a bunch of rules between entities and just hit go and see what emergent behavior arises, and then the player is given ways of interacting with these entities via the same rules. It reminds me of Conway's Game of Life, where that game is all about discovering emergent states in a world run by very simple rules that have very interesting consequences.
I think some games have a systemic core, but only think about advantages - not sure if these would count a s systemic.
Sims 3 - you have a basic engine in the base game and then the expansions extend one system or another. But most systems only have advantages and gear wise each expansion surpases vanilla content.Usually there is no downside. Like your example where rain boosts electricity, but negates fire. Maybe it is th e need of the game that there should be no disadvantages in the game.
Citybuilder Cities Skylines. The game has "systematic components" - like buildings need electricity, water, sewage, services - but there is hardly any interaction. E.g. the game has a weather mode and disaster, but they hardly mean any interaction. Water souces do not change even if it has not been raining for days and if it rains the ground gets wet. Some people try to modify the game that rain leaves puddles and rain and droughts effect the water levels - so you might get a flood out of pouring rain.
How would you define systemic? It clearly needs to have some functionality at the desieng engine level, but what does make a game systemic?
I think the scripted parts of GTA are good. If EVERYTHING was open ended, it might be TOO open ended. It's fun to have some linear direction added into such an otherwise free game, and the scripted cutscenes are real and interesting, at least the first time or two you watch them.
BologneyT gta v is personally my least favorite in the series just cause it feels all over the place as a whole. I feel if you're going to give the player freedom let them take advantage of that freedom to achieve the goal you gave them. Online is a lot more open ended in a way where there isn't too many fail states besides the heists where if one team mate leaves the mission fails online is more fun because it relies on teamwork in away and you can work with your friend. The reason why people like freedom in their games is because they should be the co author to the experience cause interactivity is what makes games stand out from any other medium. Systemic games have a high level of interactivity I feel if they want to tell a linear story they should at least take notes from other games like immersive sims to give players that agency gta iv kind of gives you hints on alternate solutions or even hitman and thief
Well, I still think the linear parts make GTA V a lot better. Too much freedom can be detrimental. The part that bugs me most with the mix of freedom and linearity is in the scripted missions, they often have an alternate solution that's official (like shoot a gas trail to blow up a container and kill guys), but the 'official alternate' method is too hard to do sometimes and they grade you for it, which is good but then it might make you want to repeat a mission until you get it in a way that's not even that fun.
But also, a certain amount of frustration makes winning better, or drives you to find a better path that you wouldn't have before.. Like with my brother, the only reason he started using a headset in GTA online is because other people had them, but so many of them were idiots, and so he had to resort to the headset to coordinate due to all the children, noobs and idiots that are on the servers making missions impossible, and he ended up having a lot of good experiences with people later because of that. And also dealing with frustrating missions and then also having idiots on top of that make him learn to do more things and then he could enjoy the game more later after the bad experiences.
When you get tired of noobs ruining you game it makes you want to step your game up and fix that. XD Or quit, haha.
But yeah EVERYONE likes the freedom of GTA, no matter how or why they play it.
BologneyT I mean when things happen for no reason than the sake of story that's when t becomes pointlessly frustrating obviously there's going to be challenge but it's up to the game developer to find a way to make challenge of an open ended design while some people like failure I don't know anyone who like failing because of a simple error that and the reason why systemic games stand out are because you're able to create unique moments of yourself so having heavily scripted events takes away from that now I get linear does have quality moments but who's to say having emergent moments can't have the same quality even mark brown made a video of the same idea with Storytelling through Systems and Morality in Games. The thing that makes gta so liked among folks is that level of freedom that they can do so when they are restricted down a linear path it feels jarring
I just discovered your channel and I am loving all of your content. I am not sure if you talked about this yet but have you ever played payday 2? That game has an amazing way of syncing the music with the state of the gameplay. If you're playing stealth the music is calm but as you transition to the action and the cops are coming the music slowly builds up and finally "drops the beat" as soon as the cops arrive. I have always loved that aspect of the game, I'd like to know if there's a name for such technique.
Love your videos! Not only are they interesting and offer well-presented information, they also make me appreciate games on a whole new level. As far as systemic games go, Divinity Original Sin II is a very interesting candidate.
Then you need to try Dwarf Fortress. Imagine Prison Architect, but even more systems involved, and far more depth and complexity.
(To clarify - I'm not saying PA is bad. I'm just recommending a similar game, but which I like even more.)
Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater, AKA the best one in the series. Decently open enviroments to travel through, animals to interact with and you might need to eat. And you silencer breaks after a certain amount of use. Meaning that I get absolutely paranoid about shooting people and try to stab them with a knife if possible and otherwise sneaking past them entirely.
Compare this to Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty where the silenced SOCOM is the best thing ever. Sure, you don't get as much ammo as with the tranq gun... But you can still knock them out, steal their stuff and then execute them whilst they sleep.
Some random anecdotes that might be relevant.
In XCOM 2 I recently did a guerilla op that got quite tense and almost messy. I ran into an entire patrol of sectoids and decided that the most prudent thing would be to kill every single one before attempting proceed further. This awakened both the heavier patrol and the lost in the area. Thus far things was managable, the enemy stun lancer decided that the lost needed to die and ran off to deal with them. But then the MEC launched its mortar, blew away my cover and drew the attention of a lost swarm.
It is not quite as messy as when I had to rescue civilians from advent and they triggered a lost swarm as well as nearly killing my entire squad and several civilians in the process. I was quite close to loosing spectacularly. Four way battles are quite rough, especially in a dynamic enviroment where you can't rely on cover and the enemy got both hidden shapeshifters and mind control on their side.
For a completely different game, New Vegas. I was tasked with taking out some lunatic who kept killing people with a golf club. I got a group of snipers to aid me so I set up and prepared. As my allies were getting late I started opening fire. Drawing out the entire camp. I think it was 16 people all killed with headshots when they either tried shooting me or reach me. It was very rewarding.
Or Crysis which let's you drive vehicles. And early on when you are driving an armoured jeep you see this nice sloped rock right outside a camp. Too tempting to not use. Full speed ahead, jump out of the car before it reaches the rock and then observe the fantastic spectacle. It flew up over the large garage, brought down the roof, explodes spectacularly and killed several people. And not a single enemy had any idea what the hell was going on.
There's only one example that's being focused on. A.I. Teams. You could make the player A.I. too that goes to different objectives automatically. This halfway point between team deathmatch and free-for-all is very simple and not much of a "system". More like one simple idea. Different teams of A.I.
The Zelda Weather system at the start is much more of an actual system. If there was a kind of ecosystem where A.I. teams would act, grow, and die in the background on their own then that would be more of a system. That's how Romance of the Three Kingdoms XIII is being a grand strategy game, and it's an awesome experience. I wish Skyrim could adopt that kind of grand strategy-style progression of different A.I. teams(no not for the civil war, for everything).
About removing entities... it's definitely more interesting and productive to "enslave" A.I. to your systemic ideas than to remove them and any possibility of messing with them.
I love Immersive Sims... the idea of being a single character in a whole, complex, living world is the greatest thing ever to me. Romance of the Three Kingdoms XIII has gotten the game systems the closest to what I want, but it doesn't allow you to actually run around in the world. The meaningful choices and living world aspect are perfect though.
For a fast, multiplayer, more competitive version of this "living world" design I'd recommend ARMELLO. It's a 4-player strategy game (online and offline) sure, but your character feels like they're living a meaningful personal life during this one era of the kingdom's lifetime.
Other than ARMELLO and Romance of the Three Kingdoms XIII, Skyrim remains the best immersive sim to me.
Thank you so much, Mark. I hope you will keep on talking about these kinds of subjects in gaming (simulation, interconnected systems, emergent gameplay. etc.), they're the sort of stuff that I find most fascinating. Don't shy away from going as in-depth as you can.
Also thank you for your "find out more" list, I'll be sure to check those links.
EDIT: Funny that you mentioned the rain in BOTW... I was watching a streamer play that game the other day, and he was really upset with the fact that while it's raining, cliffs get slicker and you have to spend more time and stamina trying to climb it up. So his solution was just to wait for the rain to go away, doing absolutely nothing, just letting time pass.
Having not played the game yet, I got curious as to what would the rain do in the game, besides being an annoyance for someone that wants to climb a stone wall. Your video shed some light for me on that, thanks for that too.
I feel like Far Cry’s animals hardly count towards being a systemic game, cuz it’s not like they’re a feature outside of luring to attack enemies or yourself. they don’t act like animals, the player has no method of interaction with them besides direct or kill. they’re basically just indirect guns. which is disappointing, imo. Far Cry Primal did a little better
This kind of stuff is why D&D is so fun. The difference is that in D&D (with good DM, at least) anything you do goes and everything else reacts to it in a believable way, meaning you start to approach everything as problems that you can solve as opposed to just tasks you need to do. It's way more fun to create a solution than it is to just do everything the obvious and boring way, and as a result the campain becomes personalised, shaped by the personalities and actions of the PCs. It takes systematic game design to a whole new level.
Also you should do a video on D&D. I don't know how or why, you just should.
Food for thought:
Why not have the different factions in games like fallout and far cry duke it out on a broad, RTS scale over time? Vying for resourses, deploying units and defences, expanding territories and occupying locations, and engaging in diplomacy according to needs and faction barbarity.
Add in the nemesis system from SoM and you have... fun filled paradise.
I want it to be Prototype! How bout you?
Problem with a lot of systemic games: Limiting the choices through narrative. Why kill enemies and go loud in a stealth game like MGS when you could just tranquilise them and ship them to Mother Base? Or Dishonored. Going for the good ending limits you to ghosting, poison arrows and choke holds.
Amazing video. Can't say how many hours I played Shadow of Modor by experimenting with different combinations I could figure out. The story was god awful, but aggroing a whole camp with a bunch of elites and whittling them away bit by bit was so much fun.
Well, when it comes to having elements react with the environment and with each other my favourite example is Divinity Original Sin 2.
You can hit someone with a blade, electrify the blood puddle beneath their feet, or throw an oil flask at them, set the oil ablaze, douse the fire and blind them in the smoke. Or you can make it rain and throw a fireball close to you, use "Blessing" on the steam cloud and thus be able to get invisibility from entering it. Or you can kill a noxious enemy who will explode into a poison puddle and then use "Curse" on it to turn it into acid so it burns through enemies' armour.
Minecraft does it. Enemies react to being attacked by fighting back. Skellettons got a ranged weapon and can hit other skelletons (and other monsters) mid-fight.
Alsi it reminds me of a case in Skyrim:
I was travveling towards a cave and infront of it was qute a big fight. A bunch if skelletons was fighting a group of vampires when some wolves hit the scene and started going into the fight. Then a dragon descended as one of the skelletons noticed me. We had a nice 5-way fight.
Mark. Thanks for posting these. I’m so interested in pursuing a career in game design. Have you come across global universities programs in this field or other facilities to help enter this field? I am finishing High School and looking into different fields of study and this definitely has my interest. Thanks in advance.
This is PRECISELY why I love Spelunky! Ok so there are spikes over there on that floor tile. If the player falls on them, they die. If a Spider jumps on them, the spider dies. If the player throws a stunned enemy Caveman on them, the caveman dies. This is the same with almost everything. Every single trap can kill enemies, and the player can use this when fighting them off. Not only this, but the game's items also interact with this. If a Jetpack gets crushed by a crush trap, it will explode damaging nearby enemies and destroying nearby blocks. If the player lands on spikes while wearing a cape they will be fine. etc. AND I LOVE IT!
In general, I liked this video and agreed with it.
However, I felt you didn't go enough into Roguelikes since they are some of the oldest examples of single player gaming (including NetHack which has been actively developed for over 30 years! - http://nethack.org/) as well as of systemic gaming. A major intent of Roguelikes is so players can generate stories to share due to permanent character death (in many/most cases) and procedurally-generated maps.
A more recent Roguelike example is Incursion (http://www.incursion-roguelike.net/, http://incursion.wikidot.com/start). There is freedom within the ruleset to allow tremendous amounts of player input and problem-solving. And, yes, enemies can fight each other.
Very interesting as usual though I must say I've always found the police quite dumb in all GTA.
The best I can remember is from the first Mafia game, where the police actually did it's job trying to give you tickets from going too fast or crossing red lights. Which could change the results of a pursuit where you are escaping or tracking some other guys and suddenly the police might come in the equation.
I don't really understand why in the subsequent games it became almost as dumb as to react only to crime in front of them or hitting them. It was really feeling good in that first game that it was there.
Breath of the Wild was awesome, but I felt slightly lost because of the lack of big scripted story arcs. I got the memory quest and expected to finish that and get the next quest, only to find that some of the memories were almost impossible to find. I found the celestial dragons and worked hard to find all three, but the Master Sword had nothing to do with them. I feel like BotW skewed just a little too far away from linear scripts, especially since Zelda games have traditionally been completely linear except for the order of dungeons.
That world does such a good job of making you feel insignificant and overwhelmed. It's such a different Zelda game, that even if I disliked parts of it, just the shock value of this decades-old stale series absolutely abandoning all tradition and doing something that modern open world franchises on better hardware haven't was just so pleasing to me. They took such a big chance on Botw, and I'm so glad it paid off.
i remember playing farcry for the first time in FC4 about 18 minutes in i had been attacked by gaurds twice and having not yet gained a fluid muscle memory of the controls i was mostly relying on " hide behind rock, shoot from rock, live around the rock" the 3rd time they cam for me was on the road and i thought to myself "oh not again, i dont have time for..." SMASH ERAAAAARRG a pack of rhinos decided that they we're intensely irritated that those guard were alive and were going to sort that right out..
In my opinion to design a systemic game is one of the vital parts for designing a realistic/ immersive environment.
Because a truly realistic environment does'nt stop as you stop playing it moves forward rather than waiting till you make your move.
Systemic games need to actually trigger their interactions in order to function.
A game that failed at this was Shadow of Mordor.
During my whole playthrough of that game, I only ever died to non-orc enemies, such as the giant felines called "Caragors". The exception were two enemies that are guaranteed to die permanently.
As such, its much-heralded "Nemesis" mechanic never came into play and, where other players had epic battles against enemies that they failed to best time and time again and that they developed personal stories with, I only ever saw a bland army of non-descript orcs that died like flies or were far too easy to take control of.
Yes, a systemic game can create interesting encounters, but that is its weakness. It "can" create these encounters. None of them are guaranteed. A game that is controlled by its story, where everyone gets the same content, delivers an experience that is based on its quality, not on sheer luck.
And if a game wants to feature both elements, both need to be of good quality. As such, a systemic game seems like a far riskier purchase for the consumer.
I remember in MGS4, in one of the penultimate levels, on the ship, finding out the tranquilizer works on the gecko's. You could put the mechrobots to sleep! It was so well hidden, but essential to MGS game mechanic. It was amazing. Love finding neat ways to use game systems.
Here's two games that have an interesting take on these elements:
Gunblade NY and L.A. Machineguns.
You see, at first this looks like a typical light gun game, but it has several gameplay mechanics that separate it from the rest of the genre. The two main ones for today are the camera and the enemy AI design, and how those two are used in interesting ways.
You see, whenever you hit an enemy in either of the two games, it takes knockback and the camera locks onto them. Shooting them again moves the camera forward, and then the camera automatically locks onto the group again. When there are no enemies on screen, the game automatically moves to the next enemy segment. Granted, there are times where the game will make the camera only rotate or it's even locked altogether, but those only happen when the camera is doing a high speed chase or a boss fight. These two mechanics combined allow for the camera to take paths never intended by SEGA, but this is all combined with the fact that the only form of damage you can take is through missiles you shoot down to make a very interesting camera system.
Of course, this camera system does have some limitations, such as the face that it can occasionally be quite buggy, but SEGA countered some of the other limitations by having the first game's characters be in an attack helicopter, and the second game has hoverbikes.
Far Cry comes to America in the latest installment of the award-winning franchise.
Welcome to Hope County, Montana, land of the free and the brave but also home to a fanatical doomsday cult known as Eden’s Gate. Stand up to cult leader Joseph Seed, and his siblings, the Heralds, to spark the fires of resistance and liberate the besieged community.
OWN THE OFFICIAL FAR CRY 5 MERCHANDISE
Digital Deluxe Pack includes: Big Game Hunter Pack, Ace Pilot Pack, Explosive Pack, Chaos Pack, AR-C Assault Rifle, and .44 Magnum Handgun with Unique Skins. Gold Edition includes the Game, Deluxe Pack, and Season Pass. Season Pass includes exclusive content, 3 unique DLCs: "Dead Living Zombies”, "Hours of Darkness", and "Lost on Mars”, and Far Cry 3® Classic Edition*. *Far Cry® 3 Classic Edition will be available on PlayStation 4 and Xbox One. PC players who purchase the Season Pass or Far Cry® 5 Gold Edition will receive the full version of Far Cry® 3.