Gaming Far Cry 2 is Underappreciated

MASTEROFPUPPITZ.......... you completely read what I said wrong.... and I happen to make maps for some games and know how to appreciate other peoples work.

 

I make maps to, means squat. I know how to appreciate good work, Far Cry 2 was mediocre, had potential, but they simply failed to deliver. As a game it is forgettable.

 

Best Gameplay Mechanic Ever: Malaria.

Far Cry 2 was one of the worst games I've had the chance to play.

 

unfortunately I'm one of the guys to get it on release.. it was probably one of the worst games ever just because of the 2 endings.. I mean the mechanics like shooting the guided rpg was kind of fun and there was some interesting parts (like making a quick decision on whether that girl lived or died)

other than that the game was complete spawn enemy.. shoot with not much in between.. the guys who loved it.. I know exactly who they are- console gamers XD no I'm serious.. every console guy who owned a jacked up computer that's on the botnet loved it

mainly because the engine let lower end machines run it and it looked half way decent.. truth is they've never seen anything better so it was great XD everyone else- pure garbage especially the ends

 

This is probably the best trolling article I've ever read! . I'm a little confused how a game you admit has pretty major flaws, and is rated 85 on metacritic is under-rated. I suspect this article was written with click-throughs and comment generated in mind, and that's not neccesarily a bad thing. After all, people like little better than proving themselves to be more correct that someone else.

For the record, Far Cry 2 is pretty generic. It's also very dull most of the time. The defence here is essentially: 'you make your own fun'. Call me old fashioned, but after spending £800 on a decent gaming PC, and £30(ish) on the game itself, I expect a little fun of the pre-packaged variety. After all, I can sit around with a map of Africa, draw a few troop formation on it, and plan attacks all day long for just a few quid...

 

Waste of time the game is 2 years old and wasn't good everyone knows that. Yes had lots of good points (open map, great graphics and time laps) but the game play was repetitive.

There are games out there that do not have the graphics of Far Cry 2 or any grandiose feature but have better game play.

Try and review Blockland (mainly for kids) but it has more playability then this game.
http://www.blockland.us/index.asp

 

Sorry thought I was editing the post

 

This.

 

Did they fix the absolutely horrid mouselag on the PC version yet? I just can't play the game because it feels like I'm playing an xbox FPS but with one of those SmartFRAG adaptors. Really odd mouse acceleration that seems to get worse the more sensitivity you apply. Extremely annoying. That broke the game for me, I think I persevered for about 45 minutes before getting completely fed up with not being able to acquire targets fast enough.

 

There was the tiniest kernel of cracking gameplay in there, unfortunately it was bundled up in a game that was for the most part utter dross.

 

Count yourselves lucky. I had no mouse issues, and played through the entire game, convincing myself that the money I spent wasn't wasted because all the good stuff was just around the corner. After all, so many PC mags couldn't get it so spectacularly wrong... could they?

 

My goodness! I can fully understand why some people didn't like FC2, but the vitriol being poured out here is astonishing, especially the enmity aimed at anyone who DID like the game. I fall squarely in the latter camp - I loved FC2.

Now, before any of you scream at me, a few things to consider:
1. I'm not a console fanboy who wouldn't know an FPS if it shot him in the face.
2. I'm not claiming that you all "played it wrong".
3. I'm not a retard.

That said, a few comments on this article and on the comments here:

1. Understanding the article
A lot of you critics seem to have misinterpreted this article. You claim that the game was over-appreciated, not under-appreciated, and you cite the overwhelmingly positive review scores. Please notice how, on page 1, the author writes that he is referring to the popular consumer perception of the game, not the critical reception.

2. Not liking the game
I can fully appreciate how a lot of you don't like the game. Even while playing it and loving it, I could see the other side of the coin. You had to spend a lot of time travelling, vehicles broke down frequently and were repaired with a repetitive operation, checkpoints respawned quickly, and there were hardly any civilians or other features to make the world feel like a real country where your actions had a persistent effect. I get it: if those were the features that stood out for you, then the game sucked.

3. Liking the game.
Here's the crucial point: those things mentioned above didn't stand out for everyone who played it. For me, I loved the sense of immersion (however much it could have been improved by fixing the above criticisms); I loved the tactical options (they WERE there for me); I loved the open world (yes, it felt unnecessarily restricted in places, but on the whole it was great); I loved the progression in weapons and the way the world responded to your advancement, making you feel more powerful.

4. Being dogmatic.
In general, I'm no post-modernist, but this really does seem to be a case where truth is entirely relative. For me, and gamers like me, FC2 was a true gem - a treasure-trove of survival, destruction and reward. For the critics, it was a dull, repetitive slog that crushed all your expectations. Now maybe it really is the case that we were playing two completely different games (I was obviously playing the Reviewers Edition!). More likely, FC2 revealed a gaping rift between gamers that other games tend to paper over more successfully. Some games love the way FC2 works; others hate it. I'm not sure how to define that dividing line: maybe it's expectations, maybe it's imagination, maybe it's a left / right brain activity thing. Whatever it is, people have reacted to this game very differently, and neither position is necessarily right.

5. Conclusion.
I think the article made a good point, but only from a certain point of view. Perhaps it should have done more to explore the reasons for the criticisms, but in general it is reporting on a very real phenomenon observed by lovers of FC2, and offers a good justification of the lovers' position.

PS: sorry if this comment is so long it has driven you to suck out your brain with a bendy straw.

 

i feel insulted. now i'll have to ask my older brother and his gang to hit and steal your lunch money tomorrow. i never had a console, and my computer is not on a botnet. nah.
i think it was quite a good game. it has his flaws, but so does crysis, monkey island and chuck norris.

on the other hand. where did this article come from?

edit: pimlicosound i love you.

 

^ This. If we could tweak the damned respawns and fix just a few of the really annoying elements, this could be one of the all-time greats. Unfortunately those that have tried (there was a notable attempt on ModDB) have discovered that without an SDK you're basically f***ed.

 

I totally agree.

And to those that say the game had no stealth, indeed learn to play. You have a ton of things to help out. Camo suit, silenced makarov, crouching, night time and one shooting guards so they don't call for help. That's all it takes.

Just because you don't have a guy with throat cancer whispering "Maximum Stealth", doesn't mean it's not there.

 

this sums up how i feel about FC2/Crysis too
one of the absolute worst things about FC2 was the utterly abysmal driving physics and then forcing you to drive everywhere
that and the semi naked africans taking whole mags to die
i used to use the 'record game demo' button as a turbo in the car because it would unhook the engine from the framerate so everything would go about 3x as fast

FC2 did have 1 or 2 nice ideas but as a whole? ****ing ****
glad i pirated it and deleted after an hour or so of play

i was genuinely stunned at all the glowing reviews it got (iirc the warez version was out a couple days before release so i'd already played and discarded it by the time a lot of reviews came out)

 

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...