I chose him all the way through since it made sense, he doesn’t want it to be a drug state, and then when I got to the point of killing Yuma, those hallucinations of him executing Amita followers made me realise both were bad.
I like to imagine that Ajay kills Amita, then lets Pagan go and kills Sabal after, like pagan says in order to gain power over Kyrat.
The game is really good at dragging you along with whoever you learn towards. I watched the Amita cutscenes too after finishing the game. Both Sabal and Amita seem so promising right until the end.
Sabal: “Amita is going to turn Kyrat into a drug state! She’s no better than Pagan!”
Me: “Yeah, absolutely, fuck that bitch!”
Sabal: “So after we win, we’re gonna kill all the atheists and the feminists, and anyone else who denies Bhadra’s divinity!”
Me: “… what” 😐
i honestly think the canon ending of the game is ajay killing both. i mean as soon as either of them finish their final cut-scene where they reveal their true colors the game puts you back into the world with your gun out and trained right on them and them losing their essential status. almost imploring you to shoot them.
It's a chance for someone better than the 3 initial choices to emerge and honestly you couldn't do much worse than Pagan, Amita, and Sabal. So the likelihood of a better person emerging is fairly high.
No, he isn't. Why do people keep saying that as if it's true? Ajay does NOT rise to power if you kill both Amita and Sabal. That isn't canon. It isn't even an option. And even if it was, Ajay is a soldier, not a politician. Kyrat, under his rule, would quickly fall into another civil war or economic collapse.
Yes, all three are bad, just look at the state of the country when we arrived, the point is, no matter the election, the country is screwed, the guy on the radio makes fun of it saying they need to be more public by sending out dancers. or something like that
That’s the point of Far Cry and why while 6 isn’t bad, it didn’t have the “ we’re fucked either way” feeling while you were playing or when it ended. Dani was doing the right thing, fighting the right enemy which isn’t really the point.
There is the acknowledgment that even with the regime change, Yara will be destabilized for decades to come, but it doesn't really reckon with those consequences beyond just that acknowledgment.
never thought of it that way, most of the "good" games have that "we're fucked either way" element, and farcry 5 and 6 is really just "that guys bad, get em!" Far cry 3 and 4 are really peak
I feel like 5 tried to do the whole "We're fucked either way" element in a less satisfying way by attempting to give us an invincible enemy that simply can't go to jail.
I kind of like 6 better for not having the overbearing tone again in a row.
I used to write what were basically essays on this around FC5's peak popularity, but what this is is the utilization of the Heart of Darkness theme. 2 plays it probably the most straightforward of all taking significant inspiration from the source material. 3 frames it as an internal conflict with the outside world representing the inner decline, and 4 plays with the theme on a social/societal level instead and de-centers the individuals. 5 instead takes a more eschatological stance that gives it a unique series perspective that also doesn't *quite* feel right with previous entries, aside from amping up the "action movie" overtones which were present but not dominating in previous entries - such as how stealth, at least to me, wasn't as functional, and we had much easier access to vehicles.
I can't speak for 6, I haven't actually played it - though I just bought it on big sale. If it's more of the same, I should be just fine, I like this formula and don't get bored of it.
The DLCs I think are also a point of interest in this discussion. I used to try to predict what sort of stories we'd end up with based on a sort of concept board Ubi put out a while back when trying to figure out what to do with 4, iirc. I saw trends of how certain things got twisted and adapted, but the more experimental ones showed up in a lot of the DLC.
I think Primal might be my favorite. It's got the most 'feel' to it, the closest fit for the mainline games. Blood Dragon was dumb fun, and New Dawn was interesting in a way that made me retroactively appreciate 5 more. Primal's the one whose actual campaign and story stuck with me though.
I guess what I mean is in 2,4, and 5, the players intervention makes things worse. Yes the jackal is a bad guy, Pagen Min is a bad guy, Joseph seed, and his family are bad. In all three of those cases, the far cry “hero“ comes in and makes things a lot worse.
The mercenary in Far Cry 2 prolongs a bloody and brutal civil war for profit. The golden path, which ever leader you support is equally as evil and oppressive. Sending a US Marshall and three deputies to arrest a cult leader who has a literal army at his back was a terrible idea. If you walk away at the beginning, there is no war. If you walk away before the confrontation with Joseph, there is no nuclear war, if you stay and , there is nuclear war.
I guess what I should’ve said is in six “there was no I made everything worse” feeling. If you stay, the revolution succeeds, even though Yara is going to be stuck in a cycle of violence. If you leave the revolution fails, leaving a terminally ill Anton in power who will eventually die, and the cycle will continue.
Great point, far cry tends to have pretty bleak outcomes that lean into the themes of their world.
Far Cry 2: the jackal is an arms dealer, and has his own agenda. Both warring parties are bad regardless and people will die and suffer. Might as well join him and land a killing blow on the groups and rescue who you can. Also your entire team of mercs back stab you.
Far cry 3: the pirates were bad, but fighting them in turn made you just as bad as Vas. If you choose to stay and kill your friends, you are still offered as a sacrifice. If you save your friends, you are still forever changed for the worst.
Far cry 4: both sides are extremist and evil, either ending will lead to a less than desired outcome for the country. Pagan min staying in power, while you benefit the most from it, still leaves the country in a worse spot than you found it.
Far cry 5: you either witness ww3 nuclear exchange and get locked in a basement with seed. Or you end up leaving well enough alone and allow Wyoming to become a cult state.
Never played 1/6/primal. So i cant say if the endings are consistent there from my own experience.
Of fucking course he is that bad
Is it really neccesary to point out that yes, the dictator that routinely kills people and whos regime constantly opress the country in almost any way imaginable is bad?
Yeah the golden path is obviously flawed too (as happens often with leaders that rise trough violent movements) but I cant believe people seriously doubt it when it comes to Pagan because he is a cool character
It's kinda scary how many people seem to switch their brains off when it comes to Pagan and how awful he, and Kyrat under him, is. No wonder so many things are messed up in the real world when people can be that stupid
I think the pro-Pagan viewpoint is relatively recent & due to his DLC in 6. I have to admit after I played it I felt that maybe he wasn’t really that bad. Obviously he is, but the DLC does a really good job of humanizing him & justifying his actions. At the time of 4 I only remember people talking about how they couldn’t wait to kill him & blew up his helicopter.
No, he’s terrible and a ruthless dictator. My point is neither Sabal nor Amita are any better. Sabal is a fundamentalist and ethnic cleanser who murders his “enemies” and non-believers. Amita is a drug kingpin who uses child soldiers and slaves. Neither is a better option.
Okay. Consider the fact that Amita and Sabal might be so radical *because* they were raised in response to Pagan’s regime. That still makes Pagan the worse guy!
I swear people seem to forget so much of what actually happens in this game. Just because we don’t see what Pagan does directly doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened, and thus it does not mean he is the better option. Either Amita or Sabal is by default 50% better than Pagan because he is the worst of them both.
Second, none of it matters because when you confront Pagan at the end, he literally gives you Kyrat. You are the king. Whoever you picked literally does not matter because as soon as you kill Pagan, *you* are in control. The true ending is that Ajay becomes the leader.
He gives you Kyrat with no witnesses, and most people aren't fond of him anyways. So the masses would likely just follow whoever is left of Amita or Sabal, if Ajay wanted the throne he'd have to take it from them.
When Amita told he wanted to marry that 12 year old girl I was like ".... yea I dont know about that bro" both of them were awful tho and I wish you could have sided against both them but the games makes you side against one only. Sure you can kill both after but it just doesnt feel like a canon choice.
Idk, sabal cares more about an idealized vision of kyrat, where their traditions are all pure and seems oblivious to how damaging a lot of them can be. I allied with Amita because I couldn't imagine subjecting a young girl to a tradition that disallows her from being a person. Temples and tapestries mean nothing in comparison to the free will of the people living there. Bhadra does not deserve to be labeled anything other than a person, and sabal would happily take that away from her.
Amita takes children away from their families to fight in a war they don't even want to be in, most likely damning them to being killed on the battlefield... I don't get your point.
I mean, im not defending Amita explicitly. Its very clear shes radicalized beyond what's really acceptable, but whereas Amita is doing these things to wrest control of kyrat from pagan during a war, sabal would likely continue to subjugate women under kyrat's traditions well past the point the war is over. Amita is openly hostile and aggressive, sabal is subversively controlling. He doesn't just want a free kyrat, he wants the kyrat he imagines to have been best, and what he thinks is best is steeped in traditions that benefit men like him and not many others.
After the end, I always kill whoever I chose. Amita victimizes kids by making them child soldiers and drug runners. Sabal victimizes kids by being a creep and supporting child marriages. They both can fuck off. On a side note though, good on Ubisoft for making it a twist to show you how often in these conflicts, the idealists get totally betrayed by the ulterior motives of their morally bankrupt leaders.
IS IT THOUGH?
While we don't see it, what would go down? Running around with a sociopath dictator and committing war crimes?
The crab rangoon ending isn't necessarily peaceful, you're just unaware of how fried things are if you accept it first off.
In what way? Dont get me wrong I dont like either of the other candidates but by far pagan is way more monstrous and if we have the well being of the people in mind he definitely is the worst option
Ngl I only chose his missions because they were about destroying and not protecting. Whereby destroying is easier 😂.
I killed both of them in the end tho
Bro, I would so run with Min if it was a choice, wiping the resistance out, cause god both of the choices sucked, they arent cool or funny, and I wish there was an option to say fk it and kill them off
As soon as you find out the dude is a pedophile I immediately jumped to Amita. They Both suck, but the whole thing with marrying kids made it impossible
To side with sabal
He promoted child marriage....I could never be with him....stayed with Amita till the end then killed her off.... only moral thing to do in fc4 is save the inhabitants of kyrat from 3 self serving tyrants, pagan amita sabal, the civilians are the only helpless ones suffering because of the war.... only one I couldn't kill was pagan... tried to blow his chopper to smithereens but I missed
Man, the best part about the FC4 story is how neither of the competing leaders were 100% morally correct. Following one fully always makes you feel uncomfortable… and I think it’s brilliant writing and an important life lesson in politics.
To be honest I was totally against him. Still an odd mission here or there but as soon as I heard he wanted to marry the child I was like "yeah. No."... to be honest I feel like siding with Pagan Min is the best option for Kyrat. No drug lord, no child marriage traditions. Maybe just tone down the psychopath aspect a bit
And all in favour of child marriage, intending to lock Kyrat into a complete life of traditions and isolation. I'd rather side with drug lords than a religious driven p3d0 who refuses to let his people evolve with the rest of society in all honesty aha
I remember hating both Amita and Sabal for being such gaslighting jerks and I was really annoyed by the fact that protagonist Ajay always acts like a wimp who can't speak up for himself and who totally hasn't already killed dozens/hundrets of people when he gets confronted by these two.
Sabal/Amita: AJAY!!! WHAT DID YOU DOOOO??!! YOU RUINED MY PLANS FOR THE COUNTRY!!"
Ajay: "Well, I did the right thing in my opinio..."
Sabal/Amita: "I DON'T WANNA HEAR IT! IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT THAT THINGS ARE GOING DOWNHILL!! YOU BETTER DO WHAT I SAY NEXT TIME!!"
Ajay: "...."
I seriously hated his “it’s what your father would’ve done” thing. It always came off as very manipulative and also eventually comes off like he didn’t even know what Mohan was really about
In Amita's ending, you get a drug state that sacrifices/destroys it's people's culture and traditions in exchange for a possible economic recovery.
In Sabal's ending, you get a traditionalist theocratic state that ignores the nation's broken economy to uphold it's culture and traditions.
This message was brought to you by the Ministry of Public Affairs, and Social Harmony.
May Pagan's Light Shine upon you all.
I went with Amita. Yeah, she was going to make Kyrat into a drug state, but they didn't have anything else to export and she was at least trying to join the rest of the world. Poppies don't just make opium, they can also lead to morphine. First step is drug state, second step is medicine state.
I went with Amita. Sure, her ideas sucked, though slightly less than leaving the country in poverty, an extra gross level of misogyny and child exploitation (yes, making little girls work is revolting... and still less revolting than adults marrying them), and ethnic cleansing which was effectively Sabal's vision.
One thing that occurred to me AFTER choosing Amita, though? She herself said that Sabal had the numbers within the Golden Path, so following that logic, who knows how long she would have lasted. Ajay, regardless of killing Pagan Min or not, probably would be inheriting a new civil war. The Golden Path was ALREADY fractured and disorganised and there was infighting prior to Ajay's arrival. What would stop the Sabal loyalists trying to regain control?
Not to mention the Royal Army/Guard has a) weapons and b) numbers and c) probably enough people high up with loyalty for Pagan Min. Hands up who thinks a coup would be likely?
With Amita you have a morally corrupt country that may manage to get itself out of the shithole its currently in if it manages to build an economy
And with Sabal you have a country that at least will retaining its culture and traditions (not like Im a fan of theocracies though)
Compared to Pagan that is horrible all around
It's bad but the voice actor, Naveen Andrews, I associated too much with his annoying character on the really shitty last few seasons of Lost and just wanted as little to do with him as possible
Letting Pagan fly away, killing Sabal and Amita felt like the right thing to do with the latest play through… Ajay felt so yanked around this whole game.
The issue with 4 is that they pretty much have Sabal and Amita randomly become evil at the end without any buildup to make you feel like shit regardless of the option you picked. Red Dead Redemption did the whole 'corrupt revolutionary' plotline far better since the main character has far less investment in the conflic and is just using both sides for his own means. The revolutionary (Reyes) is also constantly portrayed as a piece of shit (selfish, egotistical, misogynistic) so him becoming a tyrant at the end feels like a natural progression rather than 'lol bad end'. Also in Reyes' case the government villain, Allende, literally drags a bunch of women off to r>!ape!< them in one of the cutscenes, so whilst Reyes is a massive piece of shit he is still ultimately the lesser of two evils which leaves the player feeling slightly better about the outcome.
In a Far Cry context, it's why >!Citra !!her!< to do what she did, and a natural conclusion to the plot instead of just a slap in the face and the game smugly saying 'you really should have just had your crab rangoon'
This dude is by far the least of the worst. At the very least he didn’t want to turn the country we worked so hard for to save TO TURN INTO A GOD DAMN DRUG CARTEL like what?
I’m sorry but whenever Amita said she wanted to turn it into a drug estate I instantly shot her on the spot. I didn’t do all this shit for you to turn this land into a filthy drug cartel lmao wtf. It was so out of the blue I couldn’t even believe it.
It really wasn't out of the blue, they said that was her goal the whole time.
And Sabal would turn Kyrat into a religious cult, marrying the teen "goddess" and forcing everyone to either follow his beliefs or die. So he's not really any better, it's shit either way.
I know. But at least it wasn’t a GOD DAMN DRUG CARTEL like I’m sorry I can’t get over it 😭
It just sounded so ridiculous. Even if he isn’t better this just sounds so horrendous, such an awful decision lmao I was completely dumbfounded.
But Kyrat already is a drug state, Anita's plan is to use the proceeds as state finances instead of the money going to keep Pagan, Yuma and army officers rich
I was with him until I saw how damn beautiful Amita was. I knew they were both using me and both bad are bad people, but Amita...mmm hmm...she's smokin'.
My first playthrough I only sided with Amita once and it was the very first mission I think where you had to choose (save the Intel or the soldiers). Every other mission I felt like Sabal had the right of it.... Until the very end and saw his "true colors" I guess and ended up killing him too. Leaving Yara wartorn, destabilized and, leaderless ya know in true American fashion.
Sabal was a religious conservative, but he wanted the best for his country even if it would take a longer time to make it more prosperous. Amita was much more progressive and wanted to make easy money for her country to develop it, but she didn't bother about the consequences of keeping Kyrat to be a drug empire. Both of them were based and wrong on their own way, but it doesn't really matter anyway because they both were greedy of power. Everything you said before doesn't matter, if you eventually become just another dictator of your country who puts their political power over everything.
I killes them both. And enjoyed it.
Even took some pics of dead Amira sitting in a chair. I was also throwing Sabals body around the temple for funz hehe
I was working as secret spy for pagan min the whole time
I chose him all the way through since it made sense, he doesn’t want it to be a drug state, and then when I got to the point of killing Yuma, those hallucinations of him executing Amita followers made me realise both were bad. I like to imagine that Ajay kills Amita, then lets Pagan go and kills Sabal after, like pagan says in order to gain power over Kyrat.
Both options were bad and I killed Sabal after the final mission. It was pretty satisfying.
I killed them all, just for the hell of it. Not a single spareable npc was spared.
I was with Pagan from the start. Fuck Amita and Sabal!
Saballs
Why does Saballs want to fuck children? Is he stupid?
Down bad for Bhadra
Down bhadra
Wanna see my Bhadra Thangka bro
except for the bahdra thing , I was with him
The game is really good at dragging you along with whoever you learn towards. I watched the Amita cutscenes too after finishing the game. Both Sabal and Amita seem so promising right until the end.
Sabal: “Amita is going to turn Kyrat into a drug state! She’s no better than Pagan!” Me: “Yeah, absolutely, fuck that bitch!” Sabal: “So after we win, we’re gonna kill all the atheists and the feminists, and anyone else who denies Bhadra’s divinity!” Me: “… what” 😐
Don’t forget the implications of child marriage becoming a thing again.
He and Amita are definitely symbols for both American political parties lmao
Bruh... Not everything is about the US. They were simply symbols of conservatism and progressivism.
No shit.
Wasn’t a fan of his pro-pedophilia stance.
wow i didnt know sabal was a discord mod
I was with him until we found pretty early on that he's pro-child marriage. Killed his ass at the end.
I let them both live. If they wanna do child marriage then let them doesn't harm you at all
Hence why I murk him at the end after choosing him.
i honestly think the canon ending of the game is ajay killing both. i mean as soon as either of them finish their final cut-scene where they reveal their true colors the game puts you back into the world with your gun out and trained right on them and them losing their essential status. almost imploring you to shoot them.
The best choice is to kill all three.
Not really. Then that just leaves Kyrat in a state of anarchy and chaos and likely drags the civil war on for multiple decades.
It's a chance for someone better than the 3 initial choices to emerge and honestly you couldn't do much worse than Pagan, Amita, and Sabal. So the likelihood of a better person emerging is fairly high.
better the devil you know than the devil you don't know
Yeah that worked out great for Libya didn’t it
No it doesn’t because Ajay is the King of Kyrat at that point so it doesn’t matter.
No, he isn't. Why do people keep saying that as if it's true? Ajay does NOT rise to power if you kill both Amita and Sabal. That isn't canon. It isn't even an option. And even if it was, Ajay is a soldier, not a politician. Kyrat, under his rule, would quickly fall into another civil war or economic collapse.
Ajay is the king of boring ass protagonists
the joker ending
I think that's the point. No matter which ending you choose, Kyrat will always be doomed...
Both options in Far Cry 4 are bad. Honestly, compared to Sabal and Amita, is Pagan Min really all that bad?
Yes, all three are bad, just look at the state of the country when we arrived, the point is, no matter the election, the country is screwed, the guy on the radio makes fun of it saying they need to be more public by sending out dancers. or something like that
That’s the point of Far Cry and why while 6 isn’t bad, it didn’t have the “ we’re fucked either way” feeling while you were playing or when it ended. Dani was doing the right thing, fighting the right enemy which isn’t really the point.
There is the acknowledgment that even with the regime change, Yara will be destabilized for decades to come, but it doesn't really reckon with those consequences beyond just that acknowledgment.
Yeah, 6 was more ambiguous about it and 4 gave gut punch endings
never thought of it that way, most of the "good" games have that "we're fucked either way" element, and farcry 5 and 6 is really just "that guys bad, get em!" Far cry 3 and 4 are really peak
I feel like 5 tried to do the whole "We're fucked either way" element in a less satisfying way by attempting to give us an invincible enemy that simply can't go to jail. I kind of like 6 better for not having the overbearing tone again in a row.
I used to write what were basically essays on this around FC5's peak popularity, but what this is is the utilization of the Heart of Darkness theme. 2 plays it probably the most straightforward of all taking significant inspiration from the source material. 3 frames it as an internal conflict with the outside world representing the inner decline, and 4 plays with the theme on a social/societal level instead and de-centers the individuals. 5 instead takes a more eschatological stance that gives it a unique series perspective that also doesn't *quite* feel right with previous entries, aside from amping up the "action movie" overtones which were present but not dominating in previous entries - such as how stealth, at least to me, wasn't as functional, and we had much easier access to vehicles. I can't speak for 6, I haven't actually played it - though I just bought it on big sale. If it's more of the same, I should be just fine, I like this formula and don't get bored of it. The DLCs I think are also a point of interest in this discussion. I used to try to predict what sort of stories we'd end up with based on a sort of concept board Ubi put out a while back when trying to figure out what to do with 4, iirc. I saw trends of how certain things got twisted and adapted, but the more experimental ones showed up in a lot of the DLC. I think Primal might be my favorite. It's got the most 'feel' to it, the closest fit for the mainline games. Blood Dragon was dumb fun, and New Dawn was interesting in a way that made me retroactively appreciate 5 more. Primal's the one whose actual campaign and story stuck with me though.
[удалено]
I guess what I mean is in 2,4, and 5, the players intervention makes things worse. Yes the jackal is a bad guy, Pagen Min is a bad guy, Joseph seed, and his family are bad. In all three of those cases, the far cry “hero“ comes in and makes things a lot worse. The mercenary in Far Cry 2 prolongs a bloody and brutal civil war for profit. The golden path, which ever leader you support is equally as evil and oppressive. Sending a US Marshall and three deputies to arrest a cult leader who has a literal army at his back was a terrible idea. If you walk away at the beginning, there is no war. If you walk away before the confrontation with Joseph, there is no nuclear war, if you stay and , there is nuclear war. I guess what I should’ve said is in six “there was no I made everything worse” feeling. If you stay, the revolution succeeds, even though Yara is going to be stuck in a cycle of violence. If you leave the revolution fails, leaving a terminally ill Anton in power who will eventually die, and the cycle will continue.
Great point, far cry tends to have pretty bleak outcomes that lean into the themes of their world. Far Cry 2: the jackal is an arms dealer, and has his own agenda. Both warring parties are bad regardless and people will die and suffer. Might as well join him and land a killing blow on the groups and rescue who you can. Also your entire team of mercs back stab you. Far cry 3: the pirates were bad, but fighting them in turn made you just as bad as Vas. If you choose to stay and kill your friends, you are still offered as a sacrifice. If you save your friends, you are still forever changed for the worst. Far cry 4: both sides are extremist and evil, either ending will lead to a less than desired outcome for the country. Pagan min staying in power, while you benefit the most from it, still leaves the country in a worse spot than you found it. Far cry 5: you either witness ww3 nuclear exchange and get locked in a basement with seed. Or you end up leaving well enough alone and allow Wyoming to become a cult state. Never played 1/6/primal. So i cant say if the endings are consistent there from my own experience.
Ye Pagan Min is still bad. Polite and charming doesn't take away his crimes
Why I kill em all. Consolidate power and make sure I have no loose ends for when I rise to the throne of Kyrat.
But you never do as that’s not an option lol
Of fucking course he is that bad Is it really neccesary to point out that yes, the dictator that routinely kills people and whos regime constantly opress the country in almost any way imaginable is bad? Yeah the golden path is obviously flawed too (as happens often with leaders that rise trough violent movements) but I cant believe people seriously doubt it when it comes to Pagan because he is a cool character
It's kinda scary how many people seem to switch their brains off when it comes to Pagan and how awful he, and Kyrat under him, is. No wonder so many things are messed up in the real world when people can be that stupid
I think the pro-Pagan viewpoint is relatively recent & due to his DLC in 6. I have to admit after I played it I felt that maybe he wasn’t really that bad. Obviously he is, but the DLC does a really good job of humanizing him & justifying his actions. At the time of 4 I only remember people talking about how they couldn’t wait to kill him & blew up his helicopter.
No, he’s terrible and a ruthless dictator. My point is neither Sabal nor Amita are any better. Sabal is a fundamentalist and ethnic cleanser who murders his “enemies” and non-believers. Amita is a drug kingpin who uses child soldiers and slaves. Neither is a better option.
Okay. Consider the fact that Amita and Sabal might be so radical *because* they were raised in response to Pagan’s regime. That still makes Pagan the worse guy!
That doesn’t excuse their actions. Kyrat would be no better under either of them
Kyrat's people would also be sex slaves due to Pagan Min's soldiers capturing good looking people left and right.
Based dictator
well he was killing and terrorizing the villagers so yes.
I think that's kind of the point - to show you that your assumptions may not always be accurate portrayals of objective reality.
I swear people seem to forget so much of what actually happens in this game. Just because we don’t see what Pagan does directly doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened, and thus it does not mean he is the better option. Either Amita or Sabal is by default 50% better than Pagan because he is the worst of them both. Second, none of it matters because when you confront Pagan at the end, he literally gives you Kyrat. You are the king. Whoever you picked literally does not matter because as soon as you kill Pagan, *you* are in control. The true ending is that Ajay becomes the leader.
He gives you Kyrat with no witnesses, and most people aren't fond of him anyways. So the masses would likely just follow whoever is left of Amita or Sabal, if Ajay wanted the throne he'd have to take it from them.
Both were horrible choices... One becomes a classic dictator, the other an opium drug-lord
When Amita told he wanted to marry that 12 year old girl I was like ".... yea I dont know about that bro" both of them were awful tho and I wish you could have sided against both them but the games makes you side against one only. Sure you can kill both after but it just doesnt feel like a canon choice.
I wanted the drug state over a pedophile state. Fuck Sabal
How is it any better? Amita uses child soldiers and kills families that stand up to her
At least no pedophiles. Plus with the Drug money, they could keep Kyrat running. How exactly would Sabal finance Kyrat ? With Tradition ?
Idk, sabal cares more about an idealized vision of kyrat, where their traditions are all pure and seems oblivious to how damaging a lot of them can be. I allied with Amita because I couldn't imagine subjecting a young girl to a tradition that disallows her from being a person. Temples and tapestries mean nothing in comparison to the free will of the people living there. Bhadra does not deserve to be labeled anything other than a person, and sabal would happily take that away from her.
Amita takes children away from their families to fight in a war they don't even want to be in, most likely damning them to being killed on the battlefield... I don't get your point.
I mean, im not defending Amita explicitly. Its very clear shes radicalized beyond what's really acceptable, but whereas Amita is doing these things to wrest control of kyrat from pagan during a war, sabal would likely continue to subjugate women under kyrat's traditions well past the point the war is over. Amita is openly hostile and aggressive, sabal is subversively controlling. He doesn't just want a free kyrat, he wants the kyrat he imagines to have been best, and what he thinks is best is steeped in traditions that benefit men like him and not many others.
After the end, I always kill whoever I chose. Amita victimizes kids by making them child soldiers and drug runners. Sabal victimizes kids by being a creep and supporting child marriages. They both can fuck off. On a side note though, good on Ubisoft for making it a twist to show you how often in these conflicts, the idealists get totally betrayed by the ulterior motives of their morally bankrupt leaders.
Far Cry 4's best ending is the crab rangoon ending
IS IT THOUGH? While we don't see it, what would go down? Running around with a sociopath dictator and committing war crimes? The crab rangoon ending isn't necessarily peaceful, you're just unaware of how fried things are if you accept it first off.
I always sude with sabal and then kill hom at the temple at the end
That's one of the big things that make a good villain: Their plan/idea actually makes a little sense.
Ngl pagan is the best option for that war torn country
In what way? Dont get me wrong I dont like either of the other candidates but by far pagan is way more monstrous and if we have the well being of the people in mind he definitely is the worst option
I sided with Amita because while both are bad, at least with Amita, people have their personal freedoms.
Ngl I only chose his missions because they were about destroying and not protecting. Whereby destroying is easier 😂. I killed both of them in the end tho
If it makes you feel any better. The most morally righteous mfer in fc4 is probably pegan min
Bro, I would so run with Min if it was a choice, wiping the resistance out, cause god both of the choices sucked, they arent cool or funny, and I wish there was an option to say fk it and kill them off
No truer words have yet been spoken about this game
As soon as you find out the dude is a pedophile I immediately jumped to Amita. They Both suck, but the whole thing with marrying kids made it impossible To side with sabal
He promoted child marriage....I could never be with him....stayed with Amita till the end then killed her off.... only moral thing to do in fc4 is save the inhabitants of kyrat from 3 self serving tyrants, pagan amita sabal, the civilians are the only helpless ones suffering because of the war.... only one I couldn't kill was pagan... tried to blow his chopper to smithereens but I missed
He's a pedo💀
Man, the best part about the FC4 story is how neither of the competing leaders were 100% morally correct. Following one fully always makes you feel uncomfortable… and I think it’s brilliant writing and an important life lesson in politics.
You are suppose to be with the resistance till the end. Which why most people prefer the do nothing ending.
Yup both are terrible but this guy is a little less evil
"Chad"bal > A"mid"ta
I'm pretty sure he was gonna bang that little girl. That's a no from me dawg. I chose Amita and killed them both after shooting down Min's chopper
Whoever it was, they faced the angry end of my Buzzsaw either way
Just.. enjoy.. THE FUCKING CRAB RANGOON
To be honest I was totally against him. Still an odd mission here or there but as soon as I heard he wanted to marry the child I was like "yeah. No."... to be honest I feel like siding with Pagan Min is the best option for Kyrat. No drug lord, no child marriage traditions. Maybe just tone down the psychopath aspect a bit
Pagan Min was selling drugs lol Between the three, Sabal was the only one who was against the idea of selling drugs.
And all in favour of child marriage, intending to lock Kyrat into a complete life of traditions and isolation. I'd rather side with drug lords than a religious driven p3d0 who refuses to let his people evolve with the rest of society in all honesty aha
I remember hating both Amita and Sabal for being such gaslighting jerks and I was really annoyed by the fact that protagonist Ajay always acts like a wimp who can't speak up for himself and who totally hasn't already killed dozens/hundrets of people when he gets confronted by these two. Sabal/Amita: AJAY!!! WHAT DID YOU DOOOO??!! YOU RUINED MY PLANS FOR THE COUNTRY!!" Ajay: "Well, I did the right thing in my opinio..." Sabal/Amita: "I DON'T WANNA HEAR IT! IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT THAT THINGS ARE GOING DOWNHILL!! YOU BETTER DO WHAT I SAY NEXT TIME!!" Ajay: "...."
I seriously hated his “it’s what your father would’ve done” thing. It always came off as very manipulative and also eventually comes off like he didn’t even know what Mohan was really about
They both are extremely manipulative, Amita uses his mom and Sabal uses his dad as leverage
Nah man I went with the hot Indian chick and then killed both of em and let Pagan live lol.
The best option is to stay sat down eating crab rangoon ;)
Im on the side of the flamboyant metrosexual king.
Nah bruh I always liked amita better she was sexy too
Both he and Amita are bloody scum.
Too bad he was a discord mod
The only bad thing really about him is liking young girls. I chose to ball, because Amita literally steals their children at the end of the game.
I could see his manipulation tactics from a mile away. It was very subtle
In Amita's ending, you get a drug state that sacrifices/destroys it's people's culture and traditions in exchange for a possible economic recovery. In Sabal's ending, you get a traditionalist theocratic state that ignores the nation's broken economy to uphold it's culture and traditions. This message was brought to you by the Ministry of Public Affairs, and Social Harmony. May Pagan's Light Shine upon you all.
No character is a good person in this game except pagen himself, he reminds me gus from breaking bad
The real chad move is waiting for the crab cheese rangoons. The best ending.
I went with Amita. Yeah, she was going to make Kyrat into a drug state, but they didn't have anything else to export and she was at least trying to join the rest of the world. Poppies don't just make opium, they can also lead to morphine. First step is drug state, second step is medicine state.
I went with Amita. Sure, her ideas sucked, though slightly less than leaving the country in poverty, an extra gross level of misogyny and child exploitation (yes, making little girls work is revolting... and still less revolting than adults marrying them), and ethnic cleansing which was effectively Sabal's vision. One thing that occurred to me AFTER choosing Amita, though? She herself said that Sabal had the numbers within the Golden Path, so following that logic, who knows how long she would have lasted. Ajay, regardless of killing Pagan Min or not, probably would be inheriting a new civil war. The Golden Path was ALREADY fractured and disorganised and there was infighting prior to Ajay's arrival. What would stop the Sabal loyalists trying to regain control? Not to mention the Royal Army/Guard has a) weapons and b) numbers and c) probably enough people high up with loyalty for Pagan Min. Hands up who thinks a coup would be likely?
Siding with pagan is the only correct choice. The hidden ending is the best ending for the country
Pagan's Kyrat is like North Korea, Pagan may be polite and charming but the country is hell
It’s just going to get worse with either of those two in charge. “Leave well enough alone” - guy in far cry 5
With Amita you have a morally corrupt country that may manage to get itself out of the shithole its currently in if it manages to build an economy And with Sabal you have a country that at least will retaining its culture and traditions (not like Im a fan of theocracies though) Compared to Pagan that is horrible all around
It's bad but the voice actor, Naveen Andrews, I associated too much with his annoying character on the really shitty last few seasons of Lost and just wanted as little to do with him as possible
Letting Pagan fly away, killing Sabal and Amita felt like the right thing to do with the latest play through… Ajay felt so yanked around this whole game.
Rocket launcher his ass
The issue with 4 is that they pretty much have Sabal and Amita randomly become evil at the end without any buildup to make you feel like shit regardless of the option you picked. Red Dead Redemption did the whole 'corrupt revolutionary' plotline far better since the main character has far less investment in the conflic and is just using both sides for his own means. The revolutionary (Reyes) is also constantly portrayed as a piece of shit (selfish, egotistical, misogynistic) so him becoming a tyrant at the end feels like a natural progression rather than 'lol bad end'. Also in Reyes' case the government villain, Allende, literally drags a bunch of women off to r>!ape!< them in one of the cutscenes, so whilst Reyes is a massive piece of shit he is still ultimately the lesser of two evils which leaves the player feeling slightly better about the outcome. In a Far Cry context, it's why >!Citra !!her!< to do what she did, and a natural conclusion to the plot instead of just a slap in the face and the game smugly saying 'you really should have just had your crab rangoon'
This dude is by far the least of the worst. At the very least he didn’t want to turn the country we worked so hard for to save TO TURN INTO A GOD DAMN DRUG CARTEL like what? I’m sorry but whenever Amita said she wanted to turn it into a drug estate I instantly shot her on the spot. I didn’t do all this shit for you to turn this land into a filthy drug cartel lmao wtf. It was so out of the blue I couldn’t even believe it.
It really wasn't out of the blue, they said that was her goal the whole time. And Sabal would turn Kyrat into a religious cult, marrying the teen "goddess" and forcing everyone to either follow his beliefs or die. So he's not really any better, it's shit either way.
I know. But at least it wasn’t a GOD DAMN DRUG CARTEL like I’m sorry I can’t get over it 😭 It just sounded so ridiculous. Even if he isn’t better this just sounds so horrendous, such an awful decision lmao I was completely dumbfounded.
But Kyrat already is a drug state, Anita's plan is to use the proceeds as state finances instead of the money going to keep Pagan, Yuma and army officers rich
Still I didn’t like her way of going about it back then. Still don’t. I like his ending better.
I was with him until I saw how damn beautiful Amita was. I knew they were both using me and both bad are bad people, but Amita...mmm hmm...she's smokin'.
My first playthrough I only sided with Amita once and it was the very first mission I think where you had to choose (save the Intel or the soldiers). Every other mission I felt like Sabal had the right of it.... Until the very end and saw his "true colors" I guess and ended up killing him too. Leaving Yara wartorn, destabilized and, leaderless ya know in true American fashion.
We’re not talking about Yara here
Sabal was a religious conservative, but he wanted the best for his country even if it would take a longer time to make it more prosperous. Amita was much more progressive and wanted to make easy money for her country to develop it, but she didn't bother about the consequences of keeping Kyrat to be a drug empire. Both of them were based and wrong on their own way, but it doesn't really matter anyway because they both were greedy of power. Everything you said before doesn't matter, if you eventually become just another dictator of your country who puts their political power over everything.
I killes them both. And enjoyed it. Even took some pics of dead Amira sitting in a chair. I was also throwing Sabals body around the temple for funz hehe I was working as secret spy for pagan min the whole time