bit-gamer.net

Far Cry 2 is Underappreciated

Comments 76 to 100 of 130

Reply
Elton 20th April 2010, 00:35 Quote
The main gripe of FC2 was though, it promised quite a bit, and didn't deliver at all.

Coupled with Ubisoft's abysmal decision of NOT allowing mod support, they basically shot themselves in the foot. The game was just asking for mods..
And if not then that $12 DLC that gave 3 weapons didn't help either, and having an obtuse lack of air vehicles really kinda killed the game with all it's promised openness.

Sure I will full heartedly admit, it was fun, for a quite a while, until things that were cool started to wear thin. Once it's real ugly head reared in that's when the game lost all it's appeal. As for those who say that it wasn't full of potential, I beg to differ, if Ubisoft had say, included more things within and say, regulated respawns and such differently, or allowed modding, this game would be beastly.

Kinda like STALKER, on a basic level it's quite decently fun, but when it's modded, it's glorious.
omicron 20th April 2010, 04:55 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Action_Parsnip
If you think Crysis was badly coded (under DX9) you have an inch deep understanding of pc technology. The DX10 executable was a showcase pointless waste of time.

I gather your not a native English speaker. No biggie, but sentences should be ended, just trailing off with '... ' is annoying to read.
If you're going to insult the guy's level of English, at least learn the difference between a possessive pronoun and a contraction.
karx11erx 20th April 2010, 07:36 Quote
This article is complete rubbish and looks like the typical case of glorification in retrospection. A game isn't just graphics (which I found to be rather gorgeous and which impressed me more than Crysis which I had played again just recently). If you asked now "Why did you play Crysis again then, and not FC2", the answer was "because Crysis is a game with decent enough gameplay to make it worthwhile playing it twice while playing FC2 was a plain PITA". It was a PITA because all the things the article points out has having been good weren't. It wasn't a case of carefully picking your tactics to tackle a checkpoint or convoy - at least not further into the game, when you had guns and ammo aplenty. It was a case of whipping out the sniper rifle first and picking off some foes from a distance, then an assault gun or rocket launcher for rest. Or approaching the checkpoint with the car, jumping into the gun position and wiping out as many enemies as possible with the mounted gun. What made this really bad that you had this again everytime you entered another cell of the map because the makers of the game were too dumb to create a small matrix containing some status info for each cell, allowing to spawn enemies more randomly. Crysis wasn't the most challenging or diverse game, but in comparison it was 100 times better. I am not even gonna start with Ubisoft's support for this game (or in general). The Ubisoft support people, and particulary the forum moderators are the most unintelligent, arrogant, dumb pricks I have ever met in any support in my life, and make look EA like heaven on earth to me. Maybe this doesn't apply to all of them, but to all I have met. I will never knowingly buy another game from Ubisoft. Never ever.
gavomatic57 20th April 2010, 08:36 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helz
Fallout 3 comes to mind. I know there are a lot of haters out there, but personally I thought it was fantastic. I'm a longtime fan of the original games too.

Glad you mentioned Fallout 3. I thought that game was utter junk, yet I liked Far Cry 2 - some games just divide opinion - there's no right answer. I thought the article was good, mainly because I like the game. Everyone raves about Fallout 3, yet I thought it was just Oblivion with the trees and the plot removed.
Lockinvar 20th April 2010, 08:40 Quote
I enjoyed this game a fair bit, because I persevered, but I certainly didn't finish it. It had merits and so much potential. But those constant and immediately respawning checkpoints and idiotic vehicle combat absolutely killed it. I could not understand all the reviews. The sheer stupidity of the respawns destroyed any immersion.
bogie170 20th April 2010, 08:46 Quote
Well i bought it. Played it for an hour, drove to some hut where i was supposed to meet someone and nothing happened. Waited around till daylight still nothing happened so stopped playing it and put it on the shelf where it has stayed ever since.

Waste of 25 quid that was. Crap bug ridden game imo.
Evildead666 20th April 2010, 09:02 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Action_Parsnip
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evildead666
Bought FC2 thinking it would have some of Far Cry in there, the great outdoors, huge map, and guys that stayed dead once shot.....

The storyline may have been good in FC2, but the implementation was awful.
Technically, great.
Walking 10 feet forwards, to turn around and find the 5 guys you just killed shooting you in the back.
Ammo lying everywhere, infinite and plentiful, along with medikits....where's the difficulty in that.

I THOUROUGHLY LOVED Far Cry 1, still love it, and will still play it.

Crysis was better in storyline etc, just very very bad coding. terrible coding.

Games are not getting better, they seem to be getting worse...
Buy a working franchise - put out as much crap as quick as possible to cash in on it, complain people don't like it or think its crap...

FC2 is good enough for the dustbin, If I wanted a multiplayer game with bots, i would have bought one....

Really annoyed I paid money for it...

If you think Crysis was badly coded (under DX9) you have an inch deep understanding of pc technology. The DX10 executable was a showcase pointless waste of time.

I gather your not a native English speaker. No biggie, but sentences should be ended, just trailing off with '... ' is annoying to read.

Then I have an inch deep understanding of PC tech, even though it has been my job for some time.
A Game coded to work on hardware a couple of years down the road is badly coded.
A game that still has trouble playing on top end systems a few years down the road is badly coded.
What machines did they Dev/Test on ? Machines from Mars ?
I spent hours going through the options for Crysis, and got it playing on a 8800GTS-640 with most of the Ultra options, there were a couple that brought the GPU to its knees, so i deactivated them.

Sorry if '....' is annoying, its a habit, and yes, i'm English. Grammar and Punctuation are not my Forté.
Evildead666 20th April 2010, 09:04 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardJoe
Far Cry 1 was a pretty pap game in my opinion. Great scenery. Great sniping. A handful of brilliant levels (the first two, the three islands, the dam), but it was balanced out by too much dross. The mutants, the inside levels, the lack of proper saves, the mutants, the vehicles, the mutants and the later levels were all rubbish.

I like Far Cry 1 to a degree, have finished it many times, but it's still indefensible pap from many a' angle.

I actually enjoyed the Mutants. (Feeling lonely now ;-))
To me it was more of a single player game than FC2.

Whats pap ?
Evildead666 20th April 2010, 09:10 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by pimlicosound
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evildead666
Have you played Far Cry (the original) from start to finish ?
THAT was a game that was worthy of a Great Sequel....It reminded me of how I felt when I played Half Life for the first time.......

I have played FC1, start to finish, but I agree with Joe on this one. It had some good stages, mainly at the beginning, but it had a hammy story, the mutants were terrible enemies, and the final stage was a joke. I think FC1 is often over-rated, and idolised by the people who like to demonise FC2 for not offering more of the same. It didn't feel anything like HL to me - a game that is in another league entirely.

@Chombo - my usual weapons combo (when I'd unlocked them) was auto shotgun, heavy machine gun and grenade launcher. I very rarely used sniper tactics (there are always ways to use the terrain to get close to your targets safely), and tended to shoot the drivers rather than blow up the vehicles.

I don't really recall the final stages, but I do remember some sort of letdown.
And I didn't mean FarCry was like HL, just it was how i felt when I played HL and FC for the first time ;)

I'm not a fan of multiplayer (kept on getting wasted in Quake Arena in the Voodoo1 days put me off for ever.)
DragunovHUN 20th April 2010, 09:26 Quote
Wow, a troll article on bit-tech. Looks like the redesign brought some non-visual changes aswell.
musicrab 20th April 2010, 11:09 Quote
Interesting developer article about Far Cry 2. Problem is its developer related rather than user related...and spot the heading error (WHAT WENT RIGHT x2)
http://gamedeveloper.texterity.com/gamedevelopersample/200903?pg=33#pg32
phuzz 20th April 2010, 12:13 Quote
Well, I enjoyed myself, so screw all you haters :)
(in the nicest possible way of course)

Certainly, if nothing else FC2 is probably the most divisive game EVAR. That said, even those of us that love it, can still spend several hours picking holes, and pointing out the annoying bits, and yet, somehow, I still really love it, I wonder why?

Here's a few things I liked about it that I think everyone can agree with:

Firstly, it's pretty. Hard to disagree with that, but of course pretty graphics do not a game make, so let's ignore that.

The Fire, ooohhh, but the fire was good, in fact, I can't think of another game with better fire (answers on postcards please).

The buddies: as Craig pointed out in the article, the buddy system worked really well (assuming you got more than half an hour into the game and were enjoying yourself already, at least).

The weapons: well, loads of games have fun weapons, and FC2 is not exceptionally great, although obviously anything involving fire was fun to play with.


Ok, so there's some things that everyone can admit that they liked, but there's loads of stuff that we can all agree was crap, but the chief among these was Ubi's, quite frankly idiotic, decision not to allow mods (the map editor was great, but come on!), otherwise by now I think FC2 would be, well, not as universally hated perhaps, but lets take a second to think of how much better this game could have been with a few changes...

24 respawn timers on check points - oh such an easy fix!

more scripted missions - the free form nature was fun, but I think we'd all have enjoyed a few more nicely written missions, see gta for examples.

A microlight - come on, I can see why an actual plane might have moved to fast for the graphics engine, but if it can cope with hang gliders, then a powered microlight moving at the same speed should have been ok.

More NPCs: or you know, any outside of the few tiny areas where they show up, this would have made the world just that bit more believable.


tl/dr
ok, most of you hate FC2, we get the message already.
some of us love it though, but it's hard to say why
Hamish 20th April 2010, 12:24 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by phuzz

Firstly, it's pretty. Hard to disagree with that, but of course pretty graphics do not a game make, so let's ignore that.

The Fire, ooohhh, but the fire was good, in fact, I can't think of another game with better fire (answers on postcards please).

The weapons: well, loads of games have fun weapons, and FC2 is not exceptionally great, although obviously anything involving fire was fun to play with.

it didnt look so great when you had to run it on minimum settings to reduce the horrific mouse lag to playable levels

that the fire that would travel about 10ft then suddenly vanish for no particular reason?
really not that great :\

most of the weapons were **** primarily because of the ridiculous amount of damage random semi-naked africans could sustain

it was seriously just an awful awful game in almost every way
i think the best bit of the entire thing was running over animals in a jeep and seeing as there are apparently only 4 types of animal in africa according to ubisoft that got boring pretty fast
gavomatic57 20th April 2010, 12:40 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragunovHUN
Wow, a troll article on bit-tech. Looks like the redesign brought some non-visual changes aswell.

I don't see it as a troll article, just someone who has a different opinion. Amazingly enough it does happen.
DragunovHUN 20th April 2010, 13:21 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by phuzz

More NPCs: or you know, any outside of the few tiny areas where they show up, this would have made the world just that bit more believable.

Maybe if they didn't ALL want you dead. One of the most annoying things about FC2 was that no matter where you were going you had to stop at every single intersection and kill all the black people.
PureSilver 20th April 2010, 13:33 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragunovHUN
Maybe if they didn't ALL want you dead. One of the most annoying things about FC2 was that no matter where you were going you had to stop at every single intersection and kill all the black people.

I have a nasty feeling that this was more to do with the difficulty of coding friendly AI than anything else. Even the addition of a GTA-style area-conquering system would've been an improvement.
mastorofpuppetz 20th April 2010, 15:49 Quote
did the guy above say most diverse game ever? LMAo, its the most repetitive game ever, many games do diverse ten times better.
mastorofpuppetz 20th April 2010, 15:51 Quote
LMAo, sorry for the double post, not sure what happened. The guy who said the best part of the game was running over animals in the jeep, funny cause it's true.
Xir 20th April 2010, 16:16 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elton

Kinda like STALKER, on a basic level it's quite decently fun, but when it's modded, it's glorious.

What mods would you reccomend for Stalker then?
(as I'm getting pretty bored running the same distances over and over again)
corzair 20th April 2010, 16:20 Quote
Moan Moan Moan lol

Oops - shall I say it - oh go on then - Great Article and I Like the new look of the Website.

And err yes the game has some issues - but I really enjoyed it and got wrapped up in the narrative so much that by the end I was emotionally drained.

And I played it on the 360 too.

My major grip is the lack of civilians but the game was just gorgeous to look at and play and in places was fun and quite interesting - I also did a lot of driving to edges of areas to avoid those patrols which in a war torn country of million would be many.

Its a long game and I really enjoyed the 2nd half also bombing about in a boat etc. In many ways the is a better experience and feel objectively more realistic and fun the dying a trillion times in games - which I also enjoy at times - like halo and modern warfare 2.

I for one hope they iron out the problems and give us a FarCry 3!
its definitely my cuppa chae.
Jezcentral 20th April 2010, 17:24 Quote
It looks like there'll be more than 100 replies to this article, and most of it seems to stem from people who feel the game was a let-down. It had been acclaimed to the skies by critics, and many players want to know how the experts could have got it so wrong. *looks at the publisher's advertising budget*

It's another reason for me to miss the late Total PC Gaming mag. It picked up on the game's flaws, whilst PC Gamer, PC Zone and PC Format lionised it. Metacritics's FC2 page shows a huge gap between the critics score (average 85) and user score (a paltry 5.5).
musicrab 20th April 2010, 18:06 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by phuzz
...The buddies: as Craig pointed out in the article, the buddy system worked really well (assuming you got more than half an hour into the game and were enjoying yourself already, at least)...

Buddy system worked well? Might as well have put up a prompt "Sorry, you're crap at this game so we're gonna give you a hand" Honestly, I hated it and pressed the reload key straight away. I think it was the animation that ruined the flow (or something).

Still one of the few sand-box games I finished, the main bug-bear being the check points and respawns which were easy to avoid with a bit of thought...
Chombo 20th April 2010, 18:06 Quote
I honestly believe that reviewers liked this game because they only put a few hours into it. It was fun for the first few hours.
Action_Parsnip 20th April 2010, 18:44 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evildead666
Quote:
Originally Posted by Action_Parsnip
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evildead666
Bought FC2 thinking it would have some of Far Cry in there, the great outdoors, huge map, and guys that stayed dead once shot.....

The storyline may have been good in FC2, but the implementation was awful.
Technically, great.
Walking 10 feet forwards, to turn around and find the 5 guys you just killed shooting you in the back.
Ammo lying everywhere, infinite and plentiful, along with medikits....where's the difficulty in that.

I THOUROUGHLY LOVED Far Cry 1, still love it, and will still play it.

Crysis was better in storyline etc, just very very bad coding. terrible coding.

Games are not getting better, they seem to be getting worse...
Buy a working franchise - put out as much crap as quick as possible to cash in on it, complain people don't like it or think its crap...

FC2 is good enough for the dustbin, If I wanted a multiplayer game with bots, i would have bought one....

Really annoyed I paid money for it...

If you think Crysis was badly coded (under DX9) you have an inch deep understanding of pc technology. The DX10 executable was a showcase pointless waste of time.

I gather your not a native English speaker. No biggie, but sentences should be ended, just trailing off with '... ' is annoying to read.

Then I have an inch deep understanding of PC tech, even though it has been my job for some time.
A Game coded to work on hardware a couple of years down the road is badly coded.
A game that still has trouble playing on top end systems a few years down the road is badly coded.
What machines did they Dev/Test on ? Machines from Mars ?
I spent hours going through the options for Crysis, and got it playing on a 8800GTS-640 with most of the Ultra options, there were a couple that brought the GPU to its knees, so i deactivated them.

Sorry if '....' is annoying, its a habit, and yes, i'm English. Grammar and Punctuation are not my Forté.

"A Game coded to work on hardware a couple of years down the road is badly coded." - No

"A game that still has trouble playing on top end systems a few years down the road is badly coded" - No

I offer one simple piece of proof. Anything that comes close to its looks, comes close to its performance. An equally interacative environment is also a requirement.

A badly coded game would be stalker clear sky, or supreme commander.

Running under the DX9 executable its well optimized.

On topic, FC2 just didnt do it for me. I appreciate the article and am tempted to give it one more shot. FC1 was fun all the way through. I actually liked fighting the mutants. The jungle river level was amazingly good looking too.
Action_Parsnip 20th April 2010, 18:48 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xir
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elton

Kinda like STALKER, on a basic level it's quite decently fun, but when it's modded, it's glorious.

What mods would you reccomend for Stalker then?
(as I'm getting pretty bored running the same distances over and over again)

OH MY GOD. If you have shadow of chernobyl then you MUST try the Oblivion Lost Mod. Its all the better for knowing the vanilla inside-out. Its harder but so sooo sooooooooooooooooo much better. Chunky download tho.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums