Poll: XCOM or Farcry 3?

[The Funslinger]

Right, so as I'm saving up for a trip to America for volunteer work in my gap year, money I can spend on anything else is a little tight. As such, I'm only rarely buying games.

As I'm only buying one in this blue moon occasion, which should I pick up?

I guess given my situation, I'm aiming for replayability, but I'd still like to hear any other reasons you can make for buying them.

Edit: It's just occurred to me this belongs in Game Discussion. Force of habit.

 

[Andy Shandy]

Well, while I haven't played Far Cry 3, so therefore can't speak for its' quality, XCOM is very fun, especially when it comes to naming soldiers and the like (as you have seen in the chat =P)

There's nothing like being able to say that Graham "Canadaman" Stark panicked and blew Hideo Kojima's head clean off after Annie Edison was killed by aliens.

 

[shrekfan246]

Look at you, posting in the wrong section! Silly Binnsy!

OT: I haven't played Far Cry 3, so you know, I'm a little biased. But what do you think you'd get more longevity out of?

Open-world first-person shooter with minor RPG mechanics?

Or turn-based tactical strategy game with absolutely insane RNG that just loves demolishing your entire team? And minor RPG mechanics...

For me, XCOM was a lot of fun, but it began wearing a little thin when I was approaching the end of my first play-through. Still a lot better than I expected in the first place since I'm generally not a fan of strategy games, though.

 

[Smolderin]

I love both but I played more with FarCry 3. I won't say it is the better game but I definitely had more fun with it than I did with XCOM.

 

[Tom_green_day]

I haven't played XCom, but in my honest opinion Far Cry 3 wasn't as good as most reviews make it out to be. It is most certainly not Skyrim with guns and it will definately not take more than about 15 hours to milk every single detail out of it. It was still a fun game and rewarding as hell to pull off some stunts/attacks. Also the island isn't bad and travelling is much more fun than Far Cry 2, although many good features from Far Cry 2 have been lost. The main let down for me is that I was told so much about Jason's story arc which in actuality isn't included too much. If you're going to buy this one buy it for Vaas, he's a great villain.
XCom looks more like a game for hardcore gamers as I hear it is much harder and needs a lot of skill and experience from other tactical games. I am planning to get it when I can.

 

[janjotat]

I have played Far Cry 3, but I don't own XCOM. Go with XCOM. The gunplay in FarCry3 is fun and satisfing, hhe story is genuinely shit though. FarCry has a fun stealth aspect to it, and the guns are fun to use. IN my opinion it doesn't have much replayability

 

[ScrabbitRabbit]

I'm gonna have to say XCOM. I bought both games fairly recently and while they're both good, XCOM is a far more rewarding and engrossing experience. Far Cry 3 is fun but get boring very quickly; I can only play it in short bursts.

 

[endtherapture]

Get Dark Souls instead because it has a lot of replay value.

Or even Guild Wars 2 if you're into RPGS. It can play a lot like a single player game and has tons of content as well as a multiplayer aspect.

 

[Professor Lupin Madblood]

Of those two, Far Cry 3. XCOM is ludicrously dependent on random numbers and the customization is almost nonexistent (every voice pack is American and very similar, you can't decide which class your new guys become, the gear and equipment are very limited and restrictive).

Far Cry 3, though not the most challenging game and not possessed of the greatest story, is just sheer fun to play.

 

[Rylee Fox]

I have never played Far Cry 3 so I can't comment on that, however I do own XCOM: Enemy Unknown. I'm currently on my third playthrough and plan a few more. Replayability it has.

 

[Tireseas_v1legacy]

Get Dark Souls instead because it has a lot of replay value.

You know, if you can make it through the first few hours without dropping the game in frustration.

Honestly, I would say it depends on what you're playing on. If you're playing on a PC or Laptop, buy XCOM (especially if you have Steam), but if you're looking for a console game, I would recommend FarCry 3.

 

[Eddie the head]

Xcom has a lot of glitches. People do not tell you that. If you don't like glitches get Farcry 3. Everything works. Witch is a complement you can not give Xcom.

 

[DarkhoIlow]

FarCry 3 I would recommend simply because it comes as a full package.

The main single player campaign is quite lenghty(took me around 25hours to finish). Add a 6-10h CO-OP Story and a full fledged multiplayer mode with a leveling system as a progression.

That,my friend,is a game that will keep you busy for quite a while.

X-Com on the other side has quite a big campaign on his hands. Anything else than that it has a skirmish multiplayer mode that you could play,but I haven't tried it myself. There isn't much to do in XCOM once you finished it,that is,if you are the kind of person that wants a bigger challenge to play the same game again at a higher difficulty.

I played both of these games and I would personally go with FarCry 3 as I've said before.

 

[ShinyCharizard]

As it stands I'd say XCOM has a greater degree of replayability so I'll recommend that.

 

[Squilookle]

Look, they're probably both pretty on par with each other, but I'm going to say XCOM because Ubisoft has a terrible history of not giving Far Cry games the post release support they need, whereas XCOM has two free expansions out and counting. From a purely 'care about the customer' point of view, Firaxis deserves your money for XCOM far more than Ubisoft does for Far Cry 3.

Not to mention you are keen on replayability in particular, and it's public knowledge by now that XCOM has replayability in spades.

many good features from Far Cry 2 have been lost.

I'm curious- can you list some of them?

 

[Souplex]

Xcom has a lot of glitches. People do not tell you that. If you don't like glitches get Farcry 3. Everything works. Witch is a complement you can not give Xcom.

It's also a major achievement for a sandbox game.
Simply ask yourself, which you like better: Strategy, or shooting.
XCOM is a pretty damn good turn based strategy.
I haven't played Far Cry 3, but I'm told it's a pretty damn good shooter.
It's just a personal preference thing. Shooters and Strategy games are completely incomparable.

 

[drzoidbergmd]

I say other only because it depends on how you want your time to be vacuumed. If you want strategy and tactics, go for XCOM. If you like open world running around and tropical mayhem, go for Far Cry 3.

 

[Tom_green_day]

I'm curious- can you list some of them?

The weapon degrading- Made tense situations even tenser.
Enemy weapons being sub-standard- same as above, made the game more about survival than 3 if they break half the time.
The Buddy system- Gave the game replayability as every level could potentially be completely different both times. Oh and being rescued was both character building (not that there were any interesting characters) and really, really useful!
The Gun store missions- These were just buckets of fun, there were so many ways to blow up a truck
Diamonds- the fact that money was more sparse made you value what you had more.
Cost of weapons- In FC3 you are given all the guns for free and therefore they are less important and almost boring. If I have to save up for guns then it is more fun using them.
Multiple outposts- There were so many more outposts and to stock up on fuel/ammo etc you had to attack them which made the resources worth more
Variety of missions- Side missions I mean, and they were actually worth something as they were the best way to get money.

Far Cry 3 was by far the better game but these are just things I miss from 2.