[FORBES] Far Cry Primal' Recycled Far Cry 4's Entire Map Layout

One of the chief complaints about Far Cry Primal was that it was a bit too similar to past Far Cry games, despite the time jump back about 12,000 years. But now, it seems the games might be more similar than almost anyone realized.

I’m frankly amazed that it took a full week after launch for someone to figure this out, but the credit goes to GamePressure.com for comparing the maps of Far Cry 4 and Far Cry Primal, and seeing how just similar they are.

You can compare the two maps below, and see how geographically identical they are, especially with bodies of water, and the general shape of the map.

This is pretty cut and dry. The map was clearly recycled to some extent, albeit tweaked and expanded a bit, especially for a few of the “Great Beast Hunt” areas. But there’s really no question about it.

Before you go thinking that this is a clever easter egg throwback, that Primal takes place in the same location as Far Cry 4, just 12,000 years earlier, Far Cry 4 definitely did not take place in Europe, which is where Primal is said to be set in the intro to the game. So that would have almost been a clever excuse, but not quite.

I’m of two minds on this. Honestly, despite spending ~20 hours with Far Cry 4 and 25 with Far Cry Primal, this never would have crossed my mind. Yes, the game essentially recycles hunting, skinning, foraging, climbing, assassinating and other mechanics from past games, but the map? I didn’t notice, and probably wouldn’t have if this comparison wasn’t posted online. I suppose that’s the ultimate win-win scenario for Ubisoft , where they create a “new” game based on a huge existing asset (the map) and no one even can tell.

But this does seem a bit underhanded to some degree. Ubisoft never said or even hinted that Primal was essentially being built on top of Far Cry 4’s map. Fans would be livid if Elder Scrolls VI was built on a reskinned Skyrim map, or GTA VI was a re-done Los Santos allegedly set somewhere else. But with those maps and those settings, it probably would have been easier to notice.

I don’t know how true this is, but at least what this discovery suggests is that perhaps Primal originally started as Blood Dragon type in-between DLC, but then eventually graduated to a full $60 title, something that may displease some fans. I don’t actually think that Far Cry Primal wasn’t worth $60, as it wasn’t too short or lacking in content. With that said, this somehow feels disappointing all the same.

When Far Cry 4 came out, I complained that it was practically a clone of Far Cry 3, and that the series needed to innovate more and recycle less. When Far Cry Primal came around, it seemed like that might actually be the case. But despite the setting change, seeing just how much this series is still determined to recycle, that only reinforces my belief that Ubisoft needs to slow down and spend more time on these releases. Clones of clones of clones of original games is starting to wear thin, even if they do have the right to copy themselves with each new installment.

Check out the maps above, and see all this for yourself. I’m going to see if Ubisoft has anything to say about this discovery.

/r/pcmasterrace Thread Link - forbes.com