Far Cry 3 Classic Edition Tested On All Consoles! Can It Match The Maxed-Out PC Experience? 

Just a reminder: MGSV graphics are shitty even if compared to Far Cry 3.

@@danat4914 sorry wasn't a good joke.

@Anonymous226 tell me one game in which missions can be completed 10 different ways other than hitman.definitely not mediocre xbox games like halo/gears

@@tgdude6379 Ironically , Farcry you can tackle missions in a variety of ways too.

Danat Are you high? The game looks photorealistic.

Looks interlaced

The image quality has a bit of a massive interlace issue going on, don't think it's because of codec.

I actually liked the ambient occlusion in FC3 on consoles. It gave it a unique flavor. Nowadays everyone tries to go for the most realistic effect when a well implemented outdated effect can work as well or better. Which is why a lot of people called "downgrade" when FC3 Classic was first shown off.

Something is wrong, I'm not sure it's a codec. It's not blocky but a lot of it is entirely interlaced and doesn't look too great.

BTW, even if you "ring the bell", RU-vid seems to "unring" it whenever it feels like it

Clous von I blame the suits up top forcing these to release

Well said....

they had to market Far Cry 5 in some way, didnt they?

Ezio Collection has bugs not because they are remasters, but because they are Ubisoft games :P

@@tdawg5973 word up

Optimized for 30fps sure. but it's impossible to hold 60fps even with modern hardware on far cry 3. Still love the channel tho :P

Gotohellcadz: Might have to revisit that, last time I tried it was with Freesync I wouldn't have noticed any small drops. But I'll definitely take a look.

lol what? not impossible at all

I've never had a good experience with it on PC. Running a old-ish rig with a GTX 1060 3GB, i5 6600k and 8GB of DDR4, I couldn't hit 60fps at high, or even medium at 1080p. On the lowest settings still encountered major slowdown, but still still preferred it to console simply due to controls.

Far Cry 3 is the worst optimized in the series, behind 4 if Nvidia Gameworks is taken out, and behind Blood Dragon too. All other games from the original Far Cry to Far Cry 5 runs great on my 8700k 1080 and 32g RAM machine.

@@xrustynailsx s h u t u p

mooningxuranus this is the best one in the series.

If anyone has a good pc than get it there instead of a console.

that's exactly why I'm here. I'm dissapointed it's not 60fps, don't know if I should buy it now or wait 1-2 years till I get a gaming PC

Bruh I saw it on sale right like today and I bought like joking cuz I thought I had no money in my wallet but I had 7 dollars 😂 and I got

It's just a port. And it's the shitty CPU in the consoles. It's as old as the game. They had to make sacrifices Even using an i7.... The Jaguar CPU can't keep up. At all

1. It's a port. 2. They never charged $40 or even $60 for it unlike certain games... 3. Shitty CPU. It's about 2x last gen CPU. This game was running at 17fps on last gen consoles so that would be 34-ish fps on this gen console. 30fps is the cap is reasonable. 4. Try running this game at 4K60fps with even a 1080Ti at max settings, I double dare you. As stated in the video, it's ahead of its time.

ですLoli Hunter it looked plastic and mediocre even when it came out, the fact that it runs so poorly shows how bad the optimization is. And it wasn’t fixed, which begs the question why it was rereleased in such a way at all?

Bohdan Savchenko The fact that you bring up something like plastic look and mediocrity into this is pathetic. Firstly, plastic look has nothing to do with performance. 6 years ago, anything shiny was considered good. Secondly, mediocre or not is depending on your point of view no point ti bring that up. And finally, they brought it to the newer consoles because they want the latest 3 games on one console. FC4 and 5 are on PS4 and Xbox 1 so why not 3? They all look similar. And they didn't charge much for a port either. It's just a free game bundled with Far Cry 5 or something idk.

it isn't well optimized on PC that's why you can't get 4k 60 on modern hardware.also the game was visually downgraded go back and watch the real deal when they showcased it back at e3 2012.and thnx to shitty consoles back in the day heck even current gen can't run it properly.look at FC5 and how it runs,how it looks.that is called optimizing a game.

war weeny consoles are to weak nothing to do with optimization

uhuh, that is why assassin's creed runs so well on Pc... oh wait.

war weeny Unity ran like garbage on everything at launch :P besides FC3 on PC has always been well optimized, the idea it takes a beast to run it at high settings and 60fps is just kinda appalling. I just upgraded from a Phenom II X4 and a GTX 750ti and I played on mostly high and ultra at 1080p for years.

True, but in this case is the water effect af high that causes the most problems. I have a r7 1700 and a 1080ti and it's the diference bettwen 30fps and 90fps with 4x msaa

They use a CPU older than the game.

kaleb Powell so what? this runs worse than far cry 5

blunt 420 The drops are from ubishit optimization. But the 30fps cap is due to the shitty CPU

LOL my core i5 machine can run this game over 100 fps steady

Under a bridge too far And that i5 is leagues ahead of the Jaguar chip

Try fixing your system by selling it and putting the money towards a PC. fixed it for me.

Fried Fries Fry How about now shoving your opinion down peoples throat? You should try that. Fixes everything.

What a douche

nothing to do with deadzones, the game has like 5 frames of input lag. it's the rendering pipeline that's too heavy

@@Pumpkin-Link that may be a factor, I haven't played it enough to know, but yeah, the dead zones are terrible and the only option you have is a universal sensibility option

I thought it was my new monitor, lol

It's not interlacing. It's just the game.

Check the description, there's an interlace-free version of this video

I thought the game was just ugly. It didn't really wow me back in the day, anyway. (I played on 360 tho)

Зато на ПК нет такого режима. А на PS3 в этом режиме идёт сильная нагрузка, что может вызвать снижение производительности. И давайте, каждый раз вспоминать год выпуска железа которое было на 7 лет и цена качество в сравнения со всякими ПК железками, которые меняются по желанию. Собери ПК с железом 2005-2006 года, запусти Far Cry 3😅 Ну и сравни по цене это всё.

Bought the PS4 version a few days ago, installed, played, immediately uninstalled. It was just horrible! Looking for the PC version.

@@williamjr3401 Why? I'm aware that there is a bug with the sound of the weapons that the ARs sound like submachine guns was it that or something different?

@@williamjr3401 get it from Kinguin

Campbell Troy Completely forgot how bad the deadzone and just overall control/aiming with weapons was in this game until I played the classic edition. Was hoping there would be some sort of improvement at least.

Ubisoft say they're aware of the issue, but then some quick searching on Google shows people complaining about the same issue back to the original PC launch. I'm sitting on it until it's patched, and I'd like to think with this version and all the talk about it they can't afford to leave it unaddressed.

Campbell Troy I'm convinced they don't give a fuck and that there's only a 50% chance that they'll even fix it. This port makes dark souls remastered look like the citizen Kane of Remssters. Why have I been hearing gamers talk about how Ubisoft is this "reformed" company again? They didn't even bother to test this port

This is largely a performance and graphics channel. I wouldn't expect them to comment on that. I haven't played the Classic Edition, but I hear it's worse, and the original 360's aiming wasn't very good to start.

Campbell Troy It makes it unplayable. I played FC5 right after and it feels incredible in comparison. The sound design for weapons in 3 is also pretty terrible.

Also, PS4 doesn't have a start button anymore, it's options button now.

Yeah same! I bought it for 2,99€ and was excited to play it on my series s. but the low and inconsistent fps and even more the very sluggish and weird aiming forced me to quit after a few hours. The game sucks on consoles.

sry but I get it free on pc and aiming perfect :(

On the topic of freedom, I find this game really does well here because of the setting being an island, meaning you can really explore the two islands in full. In FC4 and 5, there are mountains keeping you caged in. Hence why FC3 is really superior in that regard.

IKR. By the time I met Huntley, I already conquered half of the map ( the sniper rifle + suppressor makes it very easy to take out alarms and goons from distance while not being detected as long as I change positions). I also love what the island setting does for the visuals. The game really benefits from playing at high-fidelity graphics settings as few videogames can compete with the majesty of running through a plain of grass and trees with the sun beaming down on you like Far Cry 3 does ( so much beautiful green!). The game also does a good job of letting new players get in without being too hand-holdy. I've just picked it up for the first time out of recommendation from a friend. I've never played an FPS in my life, but picked up the Far Cry series when I learned it's also very much an adventure game.

The topical setting is there in FC5

a ubisoft game where you only kill humans? Jesus, nice standards.

Mosh That comment shows that you got no clue about the game. Animals are humans now? Killing humans is boring you say, yet you like Uncharted. Your stupidity is almost unique.

Shame the interesting villain is gone well before you have to go to the second island and the whole thing goes a bit COD with nothing much to do much shoot people til it's over. It's like the last quarter is just weirdly tacked on because they wanted to make the game longer when it originally probably ended when Vaas did.

Mosh And tons of animals... Why does it matter to you what you kill by the way? That makes no sense.

If you think this is one of the best games you mustn't play many games.

When is that ever not the case hahaha

Mike's L4IR Pretty easy to do, as this game is from 2012, high end hardware from that era is dirt cheap. As is the game, where as on on your precious kiddiestation you need to buy the overpriced season pass just to get this.

Mike's L4IR hm. I bought a $1.5K computer to play games which I buy on sale for $0.5-5. I think it's pretty fair. the far cry bundle (FC 1-4) costed me 10 bucks, for example.

Mike's L4IR Obviously PC will probably be superior graphics and gaming experience-wise, but consoles aren’t terrible, I guess.

Blurpro395 K because they are cheap

Exactly, its incredibly how people point out things that really didnt affect your experience and the immersion of it. I went back to check it on xbox 360 and was very surprised to see how well it held up and how playable it was. I am the guy that doesnt really care about 30 or 60 frames as long as the rest hold up. The game looked surprising beautiful, even for a guy that has high specs PC rtx 3090TI with 24GB ram

What is HT?

Hyper Threading

Prizzy i dont see whats funny, both of them should be able to do 60fps

This is a joke of a port

Probably not as the i7 4.5ghz struggles to do 60fps and that is a LOT faster than a Jaguar 2.1ghz (Pro) or 2.3Ghz (X). That CPU can do more double the calculations per core/thread or do the same in less than half the time - which is needed to go from 30fps (33ms per frame) to 60fps (16ms). Even when paired with a Titan X, this game can't run at a locked 60fps - even with 2x MSAA - albeit at 4k - more than 2x the resolution. So you have a Pro that has less than half the CPU power and less than half the GPU power so its not surprising its struggling with running at half the resolution and half the frame rate too...

Prizzy 24fps and 29-27fps regularly on the base xbox one with screen tearing on top of that pahahaah!!!

CPU... The CPU is as old as The game

Same i tried playing it yesterday and holy shit it looked so fuzzy

Rj Diggs yeah well, it's also somehow not a locked 30 even on the pro and the x

Most them are probably Burger King associates that live in their parents basements.

@@dantasticmania8728 found the guy who plays on console

@@marty3020 You did, where's he at? Let's get him!

Alex I I didn’t know having thousands of extra $ to spend on a computer meant I work at Burger King and live in my parents’ basement, awww sounds like poor widdle baby can’t afford a pc so he’s stuck with his shitty 30fps. 🥺

Marty can I get a large coke?

I'm slowly working my way through these games in order as pretty much every Far Cry game is compatible on Series X. finished Far Cry Classic, which on 360 and ps3 was 720p 30fps. Next up is the reimagining of the first game Far Cry Instincts Predator on the 360. When i get to Far Cry 3 i'll get some of the higher grade pc settings, 1440p downsampled to my 1080p screen at a locked unmoving 30fps. I'm honestly pretty happy with that and it may yet get a 60fps boost in back compat mode in the future. All in all it looks way better than the ps3 version i played a little of back in the day.

The dead zones are so dead, they make you dead in the game.

This was commonplace in PS3 FPS games. Huge deadzone and then only two speeds assigned to the supposedly analogue right stick. Yet the left stick was often given a much better range of movement speeds. Encountered this recently when going back to the PS3 version of Oblivion (via PS Now). Decent analogue controls in FPS games only really became standard in this current generation of Sony consoles. Microsoft had it better under control in the last gen.

hfric hater there are tons of mazing ports and remasters, great new games with new ideas, sequels to long awaited games, this console generation is amazing, stop complaining.There will always be bad games,but this generation of gaming just has fantastic games

hahaha the weird ones always come from the woodwork ... haha

I don't think remasters should be anything other than same product with higher res, maxed out graphics and bugfixes. That is why they called remasters after all. No need to remake them.

hfric no its just that far cry 3 is more demanding than far cry 5, even water looks shit on 5, and xbox og architecture just sucks dude

I always look at Ubisoft like this brilliant ideas team with l was out on the piss till 4 programmers.

can u change that or no?

Actually yea there is They use a CPU based on 2012 architecture. It's literally as old as the game. Even modern high end CPUs are taxes by this game.

lol, my i5 8600k at 5.0ghz had some problems to maintain 60fps at some points and i had drops to 50fps, even if it was a perfect port, 60fps is impossible in those weak cpus.

The aiming on this port is horrendous. It completely ruins the shooting in this SHOOTER. Did they even test this?

You can drop the game to 240p and it still won't be able to run at 60fps. It's most likely gonna be limited by cpu.

Leonardo Matheus what I‘m getting 120fps+ on ultra 2x msaa on i5-8600k @ 4.5ghz and gtx 1060 6gb

Tried both 360 version with fps boost and classic edition with auto hdr on series x..360 version with fps boost runs smooth but looks like a blurry mess running about 720p and classic version is just a 30fps sluggish experience with shitty frame pacing.. Ended up installing on my pc again and playing it 4k/60..don't know why they can't give the classic edition an fps boost.. Series x should easily be able to do it.

More like poor effort by console CPU

Looks like you didn't watch the video

It’s the better version

​@@thetechdude1It's not as it has a lot of graphical compromises compared to the Classic Edition.

@@paulbell3682 but its 60 fps

@@thetechdude1 Yes, but that doesn't matter when the graphics are inferior. If I had the option to choose between 30fps with better graphics or 60fps with inferior graphics, I'd choose the former because I don't wanna be looking at a blurry, watered-down mess while I'm playing.