Far Cry 2

who cares about the name it looks awesome, cant wait to play

the drm doesn't look too bad for this game but im sure everyone will have a good long whinge regardless

Ooops! :o
Delete this, thanks!

is it reallly that difficult to provide widescreen out of the box? jeez

Greetings!

Originally Posted by barrkel
So that's my question: is the DRM as asinine as Crysis Warhead?

Similar, limited activations, online authorization for playing a single player game.
If you do a proper uninstallation you get the activation back. Or you use a revoke tool.
Dont forget to de-activate all your "de-activatable" games before formatting or changing hardware.

For widescreen users, its Vert-; for narrowscreen users its Vert+.
http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=14737

Originally Posted by Hustler
Dont know how they can get away with calling it Far Cry 2 when it has absolutely nothing to do with the previous game in terms of characters or story.

Its no different to ID releasing Doom 4 and calling it Half Life 3.

Ubisoft are just pimping off the far cry name.

You'd better write off Call of Duty 4, then, because without WW2 it's clearly not a real COD game.

I think the point about keeping the name is that Far Cry 2 retains the formula of taking the player to an exotic and unfamiliar location with fairly realistic and open combat.

Always with the Bioshock comparison Joe :p

Good review though. I've got it sitting beside me right now.

Originally Posted by crompers
is it reallly that difficult to provide widescreen out of the box? jeez

Agree, no matter how simple it is for the user to fix it, widesreens are pretty much the standard now.

It also happens to be a very definite early contender for Game of the Year.

I disagree, Sure, after reading the review it sounds like a good game, I'll definitly pick it up and play it, but I suspect it wont be good enough for Game of the Year, shooter of the year? most likely, but with extreme high profile titles comming soon like fallout 3 I just think its too early to start talking about the Game of the year.
Nice review and the game does look good (not only graphically), seems like its far superior to the first one.

Originally Posted by LeMaltor

Quote:

Originally Posted by barrkel
What I need to know is if the DRM is preventing play after any or all of the Microsoft utilities Process Explorer, Process Monitor, File Monitor and Registry Monitor, have run on the same system.

This is currently preventing me from playing Crysis Warhead, and is really frustrating. In order to start the game, I'd have to restart my machine to clear out the kernel drivers. As a result, I have had Crysis Warhead here in its DVD packed for over a month and I have *still* not had the chance to play it - I need those utilities for work (software engineer) - restarting and starting up all my applications and setting up all the windows across all monitors "just so" would take too much time.

So that's my question: is the DRM as asinine as Crysis Warhead? If so, I'll pass, thanks. Burned once too many times.

Dual boot, one for work, one for games?

I think you didn't read my post. That would be twice as bad. The DRM requires me to reboot, which is why I haven't played the game yet. Dual boot would also require a reboot to play, but not only that, it would require a second reboot to resume work.

The problem with Crysis Warhead DRM is not the activations, it is the fact that it is specifically looking for names in the kernel object namespace that some Microsoft (ex SysInternals) utilities use to communicate with their driver halves.

Specifically, Process Explorer 11.1 uses \\GLOBAL??\ProcExp111, File Monitor 7.01 uses \\GLOBAL??\Filemon701, etc. SecuROM tries to open these, probably via the pseudo-UNC format \\.\ProcExp111 etc.; if it finds any of its hard-coded paths, it prevents the game from running.

You can see these things in the \\GLOBAL?? namespace yourself. For example, open up CMD.EXE and type:

dir "\\.\PhysicalDrive0"

You should see something equivalent to "A device attached to the system is not functioning." (the message is localized based on your loaded UI language). Well, if you have run Process Explorer 11.1, or FileMon 7.01 in the past, you'll get somewhat similar messages upon running dir "\\.\ProcExp111" etc.

The long and short of it is that in order to get the DRM to not abort when seeing these device driver symbolic links in the global namespace, they need to either be forcibly unloaded (which is unsafe on multicore SMP Windows kernel) or hidden somehow. One way of getting it done is by changing the security descriptor on the symbolic links, and is one technique I've been playing with. I'll write up a blog article about it eventually when I'm happy with how it all works.

However, this level of expertise and hackery shouldn't be required just to play a damn game. Asinine.

Originally Posted by barrkel

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeMaltor

Quote:

Originally Posted by barrkel
What I need to know is if the DRM is preventing play after any or all of the Microsoft utilities Process Explorer, Process Monitor, File Monitor and Registry Monitor, have run on the same system.

This is currently preventing me from playing Crysis Warhead, and is really frustrating. In order to start the game, I'd have to restart my machine to clear out the kernel drivers. As a result, I have had Crysis Warhead here in its DVD packed for over a month and I have *still* not had the chance to play it - I need those utilities for work (software engineer) - restarting and starting up all my applications and setting up all the windows across all monitors "just so" would take too much time.

So that's my question: is the DRM as asinine as Crysis Warhead? If so, I'll pass, thanks. Burned once too many times.

Dual boot, one for work, one for games?

I think you didn't read my post. That would be twice as bad. The DRM requires me to reboot, which is why I haven't played the game yet. Dual boot would also require a reboot to play, but not only that, it would require a second reboot to resume work.

O_o are you really lazy? A reboot takes what one minute, a games boot and work boot removes the resizing cafuffle, or just google workarounds for the DRM.

First impressions:

- It's very brown! I mean, apart from green leaves, everything is brown.
Most vehicles are brown, most clothes are brown, ...the whole thing is
overwhelmingly brown
- Having been playing Insurgency (HL2 mod) recently, it's frustrating how much lead
you have to pump into someone to kill them. If you get a 7.62mm round to the
forehead, you are dead.
- FoV is not quite right - I get dizzy after playing for a while because the
FoV is too narrow. It's like sitting at the very front of the cinema.
- Not easy to tell the direction of your attackers.
- Graphics set to very high (8800GTS/512 @ 1680x1050)
- Physics pretty good
- Why do I have to select the map in order to use the monocular? And why
doesn't it have an adjustable zoom?
- I cleared a checkpoint, visited a house (for 4mins perhaps = 20mins game
time), went back to checkpoint and it was full of gunmen again - annoying
and breaks every sense of immersion.
- Open terrain? Not so far. A series of rat-runs surrounded by unclimbable
rocks/banks/hills. Often the target location is so tightly surrounded by
impassable terrain that you can't even flank them. In the early stages,
running-and-gunning is the only option.
- Different styles of gameplay? Not so far. There is Far Cry 1-esque
detection skills from enemies, who can happily see and fire through dense
bushes. You are limited to 1 shotgun or one of two assault rifles. So the
stealth approach and the sniping approach is not possible - so far (2hrs).
- The use and behaviour of fire is quite good.

I'm going to persist, partly because I've paid good money for it, and partly
because it is supposed to get better. I may even finish it, but I can assure
you that (if you are a dedicated PC gamer) it isn't going to be a classic.

There is chance for redemption, but so far, in the inevitable competition
with Crysis, Crysis is ahead.

wouls anyone say this is very close to what 'boiling point' tried to achieve.

Love boiling point, but the graphics let it down.

its too brown?! jesus what the hell do people want? bright neon shooter 4: attack of the killer strobe!

Originally Posted by Burnout21
wouls anyone say this is very close to what 'boiling point' tried to achieve.

Love boiling point, but the graphics let it down.

I did actually think that too. Boiling Point was such a shame.

Originally Posted by Gunsmith
its too brown?! jesus what the hell do people want? bright neon shooter 4: attack of the killer strobe!

Don't be a smart-arse.

When you have brown enemies, in a brown jeep, next to a brown shack, in a brown dirt road with brown banks along the sides - it all becomes a bit too much. It makes it harder to play and less fun to play.

Don't forget - all the screen shots you see are the cream of the crop. In the early stages - where I am at after a couple of hours - the terrain is close, and is almost entirely brown and green. Not surprising given the supposed location, but this is where the devs earn their money. They need to strive for authenticity but provide balance.

That said, I'd forgive the brown if everything else was OK, but it isn't.

I think Joe was generous in review. I know some people will want to knock any good game of its pedestal, but I didn't pre-order it for that. I had high hopes, but - so far - it's nowhere near as good as I expected.

Originally Posted by cjmUK
First impressions:

- Why do I have to select the map in order to use the monocular? And why
doesn't it have an adjustable zoom?

One option could be that most monoculars do NOT have adjustable zoom.

Originally Posted by CardJoe
I did actually think that too. Boiling Point was such a shame.

i am surprised that no one else has said this yet. Farcry gave you nothing to do other than run around in the trees, or go swimming. where as boiling point let you do as you wish almost, kinda like a jungle based GTA.

Originally Posted by cjmUK

- FoV is not quite right - I get dizzy after playing for a while because the
FoV is too narrow. It's like sitting at the very front of the cinema.

I poked around in the console a couple of hours ago and I remember there being an FOV option - I may be wrong but drop the console with ` and type ? - should give you a list of commands and there's an FOV option somewhere, otherwise its in the config file in Docs / My Games / Far Cry 2

:)

Have all of those people complaining about how brown everything is tried calibrating their screens?

Seriously though, there is a lot of desert, your in a war torn part of Africa! Perhaps you can all get together and make a mod:

Primary weapon: Pouch of grass seed's and the power of irrigation
Secondary: Endless supply of paint

Just started playing and it aint half as brown as your all complaining about!

Originally Posted by MaZ
I poked around in the console a couple of hours ago and I remember there being an FOV option - I may be wrong but drop the console with ` and type ? - should give you a list of commands and there's an FOV option somewhere, otherwise its in the config file in Docs / My Games / Far Cry 2

:)

I assumed this information would naturally surface in the coming days. I'm also going to check the TweakGuides site, but I'll have a look into those console commands, thanks.

Note: Apparently it's the same issue we all had with Bioshock, for which there was a patch to fix it shortly after launch - perhaps there will be something similar here

Originally Posted by zr_ox
Have all of those people complaining about how brown everything is tried calibrating their screens?

Seriously though, there is a lot of desert, your in a war torn part of Africa! Perhaps you can all get together and make a mod:

AFAIK I'm well calibrated. I just think it's their design choice. It's arguably more authentic, but IMHO it needs a bit more variation.

Originally Posted by zr_ox
Have all of those people complaining about how brown everything is tried calibrating their screens?

Seriously though, there is a lot of desert, your in a war torn part of Africa! Perhaps you can all get together and make a mod:

Primary weapon: Pouch of grass seed's and the power of irrigation
Secondary: Endless supply of paint

Just started playing and it aint half as brown as your all complaining about!

maybe there all wear sun glasses, trying to look cool.

Absolutely agree with everything in your review Joe, it is a bloody good game.

Another bonus is the fact that quick-saves are distinct from each other in the save menu, rather than being a "slot" that you overwrite every time you stab for the button.

Originally Posted by cjmUK

AFAIK I'm well calibrated. I just think it's their design choice. It's arguably more authentic, but IMHO it needs a bit more variation.

try driving around a bit :p
at the edges its a full on saharan desert style thing
as you move in you get some kind of savannah type thing and then in the middle its jungles and ****

mouse thing still driving me potty :p

I F'ing lold @ the game's graphics/realism.
People were all like: It's going to so run better than crysis and its going to look just as well!
Well for me, graphics/physics wise, this thing doesn't even come close!

Playing it on very high now, i get the same FPS as in crysis and all of it didn't even feel as "real". Tires didn't make sense compared to movement. The textures seem much less fluent(they seem and the shadows are way to hard when compared to crysis/reality. (ie: when looking at jungle/trees from afar, you can clearly see this)


Conclusion: Far Cry 2 is just what i expected it to be, but Crysis engine reigns supreme as it goes a hell of a longer way of showing me something i can believe on screen.

(Storyline and campaign immersion go to far cry 2 though, but that wasn't the point of this post ^^)

Well after fighting for a half hour to get the game into DX9 mode without blackscreening me on load, I've finally got into game in DX9 mode and it's frickin perfect .No mouse lag at all, plays beautifully. No pretty DX10 stuff though :( :(