Posted March 14, 2024
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e50d4/e50d4ccfc9664e6dab1642591d4adfd5f800ff42" alt="QWEEDDYZ"
QWEEDDYZ
New User
Registered: Jun 2015
From Canada
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1982f/1982fd6a8b49262a5f81d4a1abb20f0a2a63429b" alt="SkinnyBiscuit76"
SkinnyBiscuit76
New User
Registered: Jan 2018
From United States
Posted April 15, 2024
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/021a8/021a823ab9955a1d6f9306e1ceb5775fd911c00b" alt="avatar"
In FarCry 2, the grass bits aren't flat, and they rotate in small patches/groups, with each individual plant literally moving on the ground around the center of the patch it's in.
These leads me to deduce that the designers at Ubisoft Montreal made the mistake of applying an outdated principal in game design for Far Cry 2 when it came to adding patches/swaths of grass in the game; 2D sprites need to rotate to maintain alignment with the player's POV, whereas 3D polygons do not. Far Cry 2 was one of the very first open world first person games to feature fully 3D polygonal foliage, so it would make sense that game designers at the time could make mistakes like that, since their college education on 3D design wouldn't have taught the use of such techniques for open world games.
TLDR: it's a design flaw, not a glitch.