Primal is currently sitting at 77 Metacritic whilst Far Cry 4 ended up with 85(Far Cry 3 scored 91 on Xbox 360). I know reviews and Metacritic are not everything but it does show a trend and is indicative of general attitudes towards a game. Primal did look fresh and innovative but seems to be lacking in the execution. Should Ubisoft pull an 'Assassin's Creed' and re-think the annual release schedule for the series?

I mean, technically Far Cry doesn't have an annual release schedule.

I'm interested in Primal, even if it's just because of the weird premise. However, I knew regular audience wouldn't take this time shift so well. I'm sure Far Cry will go back to an 80 in Metacritic when it gets its guns and explosions back.

can we call it Tony Hawk Syndrome?

Apologies for that. There was a 2 year gap between 3 and 4, one year gap between 4 and Primal. My original question still stands though. I think it has oversaturated the market.

I jumped the gun and assumed it was an annual franchise because 4 and Primal had one year apart but I later found out there was a 2 year gap between 3 and 4, my mistake.

Rather the "too much change"-syndrome

All Ubisoft open world games have.

Actually I find this new game a refreshing take on things. It's the first one (in both series and genre) I've been interested in a long time because of the original theme. I don't know if I'll actually play it some day, but at least, I'm intrigued.

No. it's not released every 12 months and this isn't a mainline entry. It's a spin off similar to battlefield hardline