‘Far Cry 4’ Controversy: Publisher Explains Box Art

Controversy surrounds Far Cry 4‘s revealed box art, which was released this past week. The art in question shows a distinctly bright-skinned man sitting on a statue with his hand on a darker-skinned man’s head. Propped up around the chair are some weapons and ammunition, and in the background there appears to be a slightly ruined landscape of grassy mountains. The man at his feet appears to be holding something in cupped hands and it isn’t clear what it is (it could be a grenade). The imagery of the man in the chair appears to signify slavery over a “minority.”

The publisher says this is not true.

The man in the chair might actually be the villain.

With the story behind its predecessor, this Far Cry 4 controversy seemed rather suspicious. In Far Cry 3, the protagonist was a Caucasian man who had to save an island of villagers from rampaging pirates. With the Far Cry 4 box art, it may have been assumed that the protagonist had enslaved the villagers after saving them, despite the change in location.

Ubisoft creative director Alex Hutchinson pointed out in a tweet, “Just so it’s clear for those jumping to conclusions: He’s not white and that’s not the player.”

The synopsis behind the game was revealed yesterday:

“Hidden in the majestic Himalayas lies Kyrat, a country steeped in tradition and violence. You are Ajay Ghale. Traveling to Kyrat to fulfill your mother’s dying wish, you find yourself caught up in a civil war to overthrow the oppressive regime of dictator Pagan Min.

“Explore and navigate this vast open world, where danger and unpredictability lurk around every corner. Here, every decision counts, and every second is a story. Welcome to Kyrat.”

Taking the names into account, this sounds a lot like it takes place in India, even though Kyrat is purely fictional. In fact the closest name of a location in spelling is Kiryat Yam, an Israeli town known for alleged sightings of mermaids. Also, the Himalayas cross through India and several middle eastern countries.

The idea behind the Far Cry 4 controversy is purely jumping to conclusions, as the man in the box art could easily be the villain, Pagan Min. How the story might tie in with the previous games is entirely unknown for now. Observant fans will also note that Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon had nothing to do with Far Cry 3, so this next game could easily be completely unrelated as well.

What are your impressions in the Far Cry 4 controversy?

[image via gamezone]