Far Cry 2 - opinions?

[pipka]

FC2 is still better than the LARPing simulators people like to play these days. No matter what the LARPers say.

 

[el Supremo]

FC2 is still better than the LARPing simulators people like to play these days. No matter what the LARPers say.

Isn't FC2 the very definition of larping simulator?

 

[Multidirectional]

http://www.rpgcodex.net/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=762228#762228

One of the worst games i've ever played. fucking terrible.

It's an astonishingly shitty game. It actually seems they were trying to eliminate "fun" factor as much as they could. How could anyone play more than few hours of this and still think it's better than Crysis?

 

[dr. one]

hilariously bad game.

 

[phanboy_iv]

Piece of shit, a textbook example of how not to design an open-world FPS.

certainly my pick for FPS of the year in 2007

Indeed, because it wasn't even released in 2007.

Oh right 2008. Whatever.

Also, the people complaining that it wasn't realistic/was not populated with hundreds of NPCs/things to do, come now. I dare you to find me another FPS this side of ArmA II that even attempted to break the FPS mold as much as this game.

This be an FPS people. They aren't known for being open-world OR realistic. Far Cry 2 is far more non-linear and has far more attempts at realistic elements than virtually any of its competitors. And guess what. It got ripped. People who claimed on one hand to hate by-the-book FPSs destroyed this game because it tried that. And this is one reason why we still have COD games.

Yes, you shoot dudes. That's all you do. That's fine, because shooting the dudes was pretty dang fun, and it took place in a game that wasn't big on invisible walls, had a minimal-to-nonexistant HUD, and did some interesting things with plot, tone and story. Good god, it even has some kind of moral choice.

But no, obviously it's the worst shooter ever made.

 

[Ermm]

I kind of like this one better than original Far Cry (mutants are one of the reasons).
Altough I would love to find some devoted easter egg to Jack Carter and events of the first game.
Far Cry 1, despite that it is huge, felt very linear.

And I agree with Planboy.

Even though I really can't compare it to Stalker, Far Cry 2 has some things which is a shame wasn't in Stalker (like vehicles to decrease running from point A to B).

 

[phanboy_iv]

I kind of like this one better than original Far Cry (mutants are one of the reasons).
Altough I would love to find some devoted easter egg to Jack Carter and events of the first game.
Far Cry 1, despite that it is huge, felt very linear.

Far Cry 1 was very linear and very uninspired and repetitive, it was a tech demo after all. I had fun with it until the indoor mutant bits, when I was ready for the game to be over. And then the game was all like 'Nope, sorry not nearly over yet. Oh and also shitloads of mutants coming, and sorry bro no weapons.'

Replace 'mutant' with 'alien' in above paragraph and you pretty much have Crysis. TEH INNOVASHUNS.

Really, Shadow Of Chernobyl, Call Of Pripyat, ArmA II and Far Cry 2 are the only recent FPSs I enjoyed enough long enough to finish.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

FC2 is still better than the LARPing simulators people like to play these days. No matter what the LARPers say.

Isn't FC2 the very definition of larping simulator?

...?

I know the codex likes to use "larping" as a generic flaw you can attach to any game you don't like (much like "souless" and "generic"), but could you elaborate?

 

[denizsi]

FC2 had three major flaws for me: insane rate of spawns, lack of game world persistence, shit adventure mechanics. You clear a check point, go 100 meters past it then come back and bam, they're all teleported back from dead. You leave your favourite buggy in some dirt hole and go on foot, come back a while later and it's gone. Entering, leaving shops and bars and the way weapon collection worked was very clunky.

They could add more adventure elements, too.

Still, it's a fun and a moody game.

 

[chzr]

game had potential that was ruined especially by respawning niggers with kevlar instead of skin and repetitiveness... what a shame.

 

[spectre]

insane rate of spawns, lack of game world persistence, shit adventure mechanics

Yeah, that's FC2 in a nutshell.
What is really unnerving, first modder with half a brain could fix that. If there were any mods or modders. And I really wanted to like the game, it felt a bit like "Heart of Darkness" (the book).

 

[Suchy]

A steaming pile of turd.
Crysis was a better game. And it wasn't much of a game, other than a tech demo.

 

[el Supremo]

FC2 is still better than the LARPing simulators people like to play these days. No matter what the LARPers say.

Isn't FC2 the very definition of larping simulator?

...?

I know the codex likes to use "larping" as a generic flaw you can attach to any game you don't like (much like "souless" and "generic"), but could you elaborate?

As I understand, maybe I got it all wrong, on codex it means "make your own adventure". Play an uninspired game, and use your own imagination to enjoy youself. Pretend that you live in the game's word. Self-impose some limitations and pretend that, for example, in Oblivion you have to stick to certain classes.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Well, FC2 has no way to pretend you live in the game's world - it's just a endless savanna. Plus your character has pretty clear objectives and story, you can't really make anything up.

 

[Darth Slaughter]

the very fact that you can execute missions for both enemy factions at the same time and nobody really knows because you are being a "secret agent" working by yourself is terrible and a reason to uninstall this game.

this excuse they give about every AI trying to kill you because they don't know you're in their faction is lazy. Game mechanics is Ok, but so repetitive that you'll soon get bored.

That and the fact that you are frinds with people from a farma, only to leave and have everybody there hating you.

Mission structure is boring as hell: You can have only one main mission and only one secondary misson at a time. And then, mission giver is at one spot, the objective is at the other side of a big map filled with respawning checkpoints that you can reach only with slow jeep or a bus stop that is still far away from the objective. Oh, and by objective I mean kill everybody at the place.

Then, after that, you have to go back to the quest giver that is on th other side of the map and only then you can get a new quest, with another quest giver that is again on the other side of the map.

The map is big, and playing this game makes you go around it so much that you get to know the place so well it doesn't feel big anymore.

bad game

 

[el Supremo]

Well, FC2 has no way to pretend you live in the game's world - it's just a endless savanna. Plus your character has pretty clear objectives and story, you can't really make anything up.

Then, if you'll try to take a story at the face value, it gets incredibly boring.

In order to have some fun you must constantly invent stuff in your own mind. The checkpoints are good example. Absolutely foolproof way of dealing with them is to drive through it in a car with a mounted gun, then turn around and get rid of any pursuers. But since you meet a checkpoint every 10 minutes, it can get stale pretty fast. So you start inventing your own stuff, sometimes you sneak around a checkpoint, sometimes you snipe them from afar, or bomb it with grenade launcher, or sneak into it and... Whatever. In essence you are not playing a game. You are larping. And I do not tell that larping is inherently bad, in fact in can be quite a fun, if you choose to do so.
But if a game is fun only if you larp, it is not a real game. It is larping simulator. At least it is my take on the term.

 

[Data4]

Well, FC2 has no way to pretend you live in the game's world - it's just a endless savanna. Plus your character has pretty clear objectives and story, you can't really make anything up.

Then, if you'll try to take a story at the face value, it gets incredibly boring.

In order to have some fun you must constantly invent stuff in your own mind. The checkpoints are good example. Absolutely foolproof way of dealing with them is to drive through it in a car with a mounted gun, then turn around and get rid of any pursuers. But since you meet a checkpoint every 10 minutes, it can get stale pretty fast. So you start inventing your own stuff, sometimes you sneak around a checkpoint, sometimes you snipe them from afar, or bomb it with grenade launcher, or sneak into it and... Whatever. In essence you are not playing a game. You are larping. And I do not tell that larping is inherently bad, in fact in can be quite a fun, if you choose to do so.
But if a game is fun only if you larp, it is not a real game. It is larping simulator. At least it is my take on the term.

That's not larping. That's finding different ways to achieve a goal using gameplay means, and is actually a good thing. It's just the silliness of the respawning that makes you have to do that every single time you go down a road or the river that ruins it. Larping in a game is when you pretend your character takes a shit once a day, eats 3 meals, sleeps at night, chooses to not kill wildlife because he's a damned dirty hippie, and other completely pointless things that make no difference in the game whatsoever.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

^Correct. Gordon, that's the weirdest definition of larping I've seen on the Codex. The kkkonsensus on the term is that it's larping if your actions have no impact on the game, or at least aren't recognized by it.

Like, entering the women's toilet in Deus Ex would be larping if you were pretending that your boss would get mad with you. However, he DOES get mad if you do that. Though it has no impact beyond an extra line of dialogue, the act was recognized by the game, thus isn't larping.

I don't really understand why being able to do stuff in different ways is a bad thing, even if it's to fight boredom. Would simply crash through checkpoints every time make things more fun?

the very fact that you can execute missions for both enemy factions at the same time and nobody really knows because you are being a "secret agent" working by yourself is terrible and a reason to uninstall this game.

Uninstall a fucking shooter because the story isn't good?

r00fles!

That would be a perfectly valid reason if FC2 was an rpg. In a shooter, you want more stuff to shoot. FFS

 

[Rogue]

This game is crap. Boring, repetitive, with shitty AI etc. It's beyond me why anyone would waste time playing it.

 

[Darth Slaughter]

the very fact that you can execute missions for both enemy factions at the same time and nobody really knows because you are being a "secret agent" working by yourself is terrible and a reason to uninstall this game.

Uninstall a fucking shooter because the story isn't good?

r00fles!

That would be a perfectly valid reason if FC2 was an rpg. In a shooter, you want more stuff to shoot. FFS

That's not the story, that's a lazy excuse. the story is about a guy (jackal) giving weapons to both factions and being behind the scenes. THAT is OK. But you, as the main character, can enter the HQ of a faction and then enter the HQ of the other faction across the street and no one giving a shit about it...

If a shooter wants me to shoot things, it at least shouldn't have points in which I talk to people to take quests. If you want to give some depth by adding quests, ate least make them fun and different enough. It's an open word game like GTA, and the greatest flaw of this kind of game is when this games have repetitive missions.

In fact, as I said, the game shooting mechanics are good. It would at least make more sense, if instead of doing at same time missions for different factions, you would make a series of missions for one faction and then change sides. I'm not even requiring choosing between one of then. You could play both, but at least make it more believable.

Well, and if this is a shooter, it would be good to have a sense of progression, which this game doesn't have.

 

[Multidirectional]

the very fact that you can execute missions for both enemy factions at the same time and nobody really knows because you are being a "secret agent" working by yourself is terrible and a reason to uninstall this game.

Uninstall a fucking shooter because the story isn't good?

I think the shitty part of this is not story related at all. Shitty gameplay mechanics and laziness of developers is what's behind it. Because we know the real reason behind this "secret agent" nonsense is that they couldn't be bothered to program friendly faction AI. No way, this could have actually made the game a bit good, can't have that.

 

[phanboy_iv]

I think the shitty part of this is not story related at all. Shitty gameplay mechanics and laziness of developers is what's behind it. Because we know the real reason behind this "secret agent" nonsense is that they couldn't be bothered to program friendly faction AI. No way, this could have actually made the game a bit good, can't have that.

I hardly think it can be chalked up to laziness on the part of the devs, I'd bet good money they had to fight the publisher over every element they added that was slightly out of the ordinary for a console FPS in 2008. And there are quite a few of those in the game, even if they aren't taken to their full potential.

Big publishers do not give out infinite schedules and unlimited budgets, and quite frankly the FC2 guys did more with theirs than Crytek ever did.

 

[Multidirectional]

FC2 guys did more with theirs than Crytek ever did.

Please explain this to me. I know it's popular to call Crytek games techdemos, but Far Cry 1 and Crysis are much better as actual games than FC2 in my book. Nothing in them, not aliens, not mutants, not cheating AI was ever as annoying as respawning checkpoints and extreme repetition of FC2 in general. There was some actual thought put into the feeling of progression and giving the player at least a slightly different experience depending on his choices instead of forcing him to go through same fucking checkpoints with same fucking respawning enemies that have same fucking cars that are faster than the one player is using and stop being so fast as soon as player gets a hold of them so he cannot ever run away from the chace and all of that repeats up to several times on the way to the mission that seems a lot like shitload of missions you already did and you know on your way back you'll face the same fucking checkpoints! Goddammit, I promised myself I won't rant about FC2 again, it's getting unhealthy.
I'm not even going to touch that "publisher made them do a shitty game" thing, no sir.
This game did look like one of the awesomest shooters ever in hype videos, and I actually thought it would be great.

 

[phanboy_iv]

FC2 guys did more with theirs than Crytek ever did.

Please explain this to me. I know it's popular to call Crytek games techdemos, but Far Cry 1 and Crysis are much better as actual games than FC2 in my book. Nothing in them, not aliens, not mutants, not cheating AI was ever as annoying as respawning checkpoints and extreme repetition of FC2 in general.
I'm not even going to touch that "publisher made them do a shitty game" thing, no sir.
This game did look like one of the awesomest shooters ever in hype videos, and I actually thought it would be great.

Notable amount of innovative (if incompletely implemented) FPS elements > Far Cry/Crysis. They did try with the whole suit thing in Crysis but really it was quite bland and by-the-book.

 

[Multidirectional]

Notable amount of innovative (if incompletely implemented) FPS elements > Far Cry/Crysis. They did try with the whole suit thing in Crysis but really it was quite bland and by-the-book.

I obviously didn't play FC2 as much as you. Could you elaborate on these innovative elements?
Nanosuit in Crysis, bland or not, actually worked and it provided me the means of getting creative with game maps and physics. I cannot resist feeling entertained when I light up an explosive barrel and throw it onto an enemie boat with my strengh mode, for example. What does Far Cry 2 have that is so much better and less by-the-book?