Far Cry Vengeance Wii

  • Publisher: Ubisoft
  • Release Date: Dec 12, 2006
  • Also On: PC
User Score
5.3

Mixed or average reviews- based on 52 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 52
  2. Negative: 21 out of 52
Buy On

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Dec 16, 2014
    6
    Before I even start reviewing the game, a word of advice - don't approach it without a CRT TV set. If you ask me, I've played it on a relatively small one - textures are smooth and sharp. The graphics are almost on par with the original Far Cry (FC). Sure, they cut some corners due to the hardware limitations; by way of example, the birds, boars and seaweed are gone. Sure, it's notBefore I even start reviewing the game, a word of advice - don't approach it without a CRT TV set. If you ask me, I've played it on a relatively small one - textures are smooth and sharp. The graphics are almost on par with the original Far Cry (FC). Sure, they cut some corners due to the hardware limitations; by way of example, the birds, boars and seaweed are gone. Sure, it's not high-end graphics we're talking here. But it ain't close to being the eyesore it, certainly, is when you plug your Wii to a plasma screen, which is how, I assume, the vast majority of this game's reviewers have had the misfortune to experience it. Even the notorious cutscenes are palatable. I dare you to compare the game on two different types of TV screen. In the graphics department, Far Cry Vengeance (FCV) is anything but repelling, provided that you use monitors the original Wii was designed for.

    I can't help but notice that FCV has fallen to some unfounded hate campaign. And I feel like it's my obligation come to its defence. It won't win in any game-of-the-year stakes but I wouldn't be so black and white about it being such a dismal failure as it is believed to be.

    To begin with, FCV gives you more freedom than any modern-day shooter, e.g. Call of Duty. At times, it presents a considerable challenge; the maps are big enough to get lost and if you don't have your radar on (at the highest difficulty setting), you are bound to lose your bearings. The environments may be somewhat repetitive, even empty, save for respawning NPCs. It may feel like some locations are there to fill the gaps. Even so, it suffices to have you seek different solutions to the missions you are sent on. When played in the hardest mode, FCV is a game that won't lead you by the hand. The very magnitude of the in-game surroundings already makes it hardcocre. That being said, the fact remains that there's little incentive to explore them beyond the very fun of poking your nose in every nook and cranny.

    In all likelihood, it's gonna take some eyewash, so brace yourself. The enemy AI, although it leaves much to be desired, is not entirely mutilated and presents some challenge, as does finding your way through the maps. I suggest completing all the nine chapters before you share your opinion of the AI and express your reservations whether it will get you killed or not. Because the truth of the matter is it will, and many a time. The difficulty becomes increases as you progress. Every shot becomes more and more accurate. To the point when you feel it's downright unfair. This especially applies to snipers, who, more often than not, make me wanna toss my Wii mote and, sometimes, get me doing it. Sure, the NPCs you come across are not the sharpest tools, and you're more than likely to catch them off guard wandering instead of attacking you but the reports they won't put up any fight throughout the game or that they're shooting blanks, can't aim at you whatsoever are greatly exaggerated. Sometimes, there's no running and gunning without any tactics. Otherwise, they'll plug you easily.

    All of the above is not to say that the FCV is flawless. At the end of the day, it is a generic first person shooter with ineptly scattered checkpoints, decent soundtrack (which could use saving for a better game), and a couple of tried-and-tested mechanics which, then again, are better executed in a bunch of other games, the original FC included. The dots were all there but the devs could not connect them like they should have. Raised hopes, failed expectations but don't let that prevent you from giving the game some credit when it's due. Having complted FCV I know one thing for sure, this game begs a remake.
    Expand
  2. MarkH.
    Apr 20, 2007
    7
    I think the bad visuals (especially the awful cut scenes) add to the cheesy 80s feel of the game. And it is great fun - best use of the Wii controller outside of Wii Sports that I've seen. Sure, its ugly, but its a satisfyingly stupid game that kept me entertained for several hours here and there. Could've done with a "turn round" button, and throwing a grenade is the same I think the bad visuals (especially the awful cut scenes) add to the cheesy 80s feel of the game. And it is great fun - best use of the Wii controller outside of Wii Sports that I've seen. Sure, its ugly, but its a satisfyingly stupid game that kept me entertained for several hours here and there. Could've done with a "turn round" button, and throwing a grenade is the same button as fire 2nd weapon, depending on context, so there are issues that need sorting, but the consensus that CoD3 is vastly superior is flawed - this is much less frustrating and much more fun. Collapse
  3. AlexH.
    Dec 29, 2006
    5
    Ok people im tired of everyone bashin wii games give it a few monthsand the games will get better trust me right now they are just trying to get the new control scheme down so just give it time and the graphics and game play will get better
  4. KeiranR.
    Jan 1, 2008
    5
    A massive let down, some excitment is posed but little. Still not the worste game to be played, controlling isnt to practicle and the game im sur ei had it for ps2 many years back.
  5. Ed
    Dec 30, 2006
    6
    It is alright but controls could be little better and they should have online on it i think it would have been cool.
  6. SteveO.
    Jan 24, 2007
    7
    Why are there so many negative reviews about this game. First of all the Wii is not a Xbox 360 or PS3 so if you want flashy graphics look elsewhere. most of the complaints seem to be in this department and it is hardly a firm basis for judging a game. Yes the colors are a bit washed out and the textures not superb, the video sequences suffer from vsync issues and there are a few sound and Why are there so many negative reviews about this game. First of all the Wii is not a Xbox 360 or PS3 so if you want flashy graphics look elsewhere. most of the complaints seem to be in this department and it is hardly a firm basis for judging a game. Yes the colors are a bit washed out and the textures not superb, the video sequences suffer from vsync issues and there are a few sound and ai glitches. These are minor faults and do not alter the fact this is still a good game, the controls alone make this worth getting even if you have played the Xbox version. If only more people actually played this instead of just judging it by what they see. Expand
  7. JohnL.
    Dec 14, 2006
    6
    I'm very disappointed. I already posted about how it complains and stops game play when I sit a certain distance from the screen. This is the 1st game to do this and I have quite a few. Also the graphics are quite poor and frame rate is jumpy at times. Cut scenes are extremely low quality. AI is laughable to the point where you can sometimes shoot one enemy and his buddies just stand I'm very disappointed. I already posted about how it complains and stops game play when I sit a certain distance from the screen. This is the 1st game to do this and I have quite a few. Also the graphics are quite poor and frame rate is jumpy at times. Cut scenes are extremely low quality. AI is laughable to the point where you can sometimes shoot one enemy and his buddies just stand around and don't even notice. Zelda is a beautiful game that shows what the Wii is capable of. Far Cry looks just like a bad xbox port rushed out the door for xmas. Expand
  8. Matt
    Jan 14, 2007
    7
    Not bad bad ai and the graphics could be better but it is alright.
  9. PhillipV.
    Mar 19, 2007
    6
    It's not really a bad game to tell you the truth. It's fun to play and nice to look at. Sure the graphics could be better but that doesn't break the game.
  10. B.W.
    May 11, 2007
    6
    Well I havent seen AI like this since james bond golden eye. I still found it enetertaining> I found the cut sequences to be cheassy with lines that sound like they are out of a 80's porno fic. Other than that it was an ok game.

Awards & Rankings

#8 Most Discussed Wii Game of 2006
#7 Most Shared Wii Game of 2006
Metascore
38

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 23 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 23
  2. Negative: 19 out of 23
  1. 40
    The presentation – everything from the dozens of graphics shortcomings to the sometimes broken AI logic – is just too sloppy and too rushed in this quick-and-dirty Wii incarnation of the classic franchise. A fundamentally solid shooter is hiding somewhere underneath, but good luck finding it between the blurry textures and the sluggish framerate.
  2. Nintendo Power
    40
    The Far Cry series is built largely upon its ability to absorb you in its sun-drenched vistas; subtract that high level of immersion, and you're left with an otherwise unremarkable first-person shooter. [Feb. 2007, p.93]
  3. 30
    The real problem here is the complete disregard for performance. The frame rate drops so frequently that the game is nearly rendered completely unplayable. I can't even imagine how this got through a certification phase prior to release.