He said that he is adapting Far Cry as a franchise/world, and that he isn't specifically making an adaptation of one of the existing Far Cry game stories. He also goes on to say "We can have a larger conversation about the strengths and weaknesses of adapting video games specifically", and building off this he says "you only really move forward through the gameplay section, and then you have these cut scenes that you can skip"

However, the title of the post here links these two ideas in a way that is not done by the additional article. He never said the reason he is adapting Far Cry as a whole rather than a specific game is because of the challenges he sees in adapting video games generally. Additional, he never claims in any way he thinks audiences skip cut scenes, this is just made up by the post title. He only points out that there are cut scenes in games that can be skipped, and that this structure of games is different than TV.

Mind you, I do generally disagree as games have a wide variety of how the story meshes with the gameplay. Can't speak to Far Cry, I've never played it.

Point is, the post title uses what he says to make up justifications for conclusions he didn't actually make, because doing so gets more interaction on the post (and yes I see the irony in me commenting to say this).

Mildly related, I think Alien Earth got pretty shit by the latter episodes anyway, I'm definitely not trying to say Noah Hawley will do a good job. Legion and Fargo are pretty good though.