Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

FAR CRY 2 A little disappointed so far!

Last response: in Video Games
Share
October 22, 2008 10:22:43 PM

So, I had the highest expectations for FAR CRY 2 and I shouldn't have. I play Crysis all the time and I know Far Cry and Crysis were always kind of working together. So let me just say, I am a little disappointed on Far Cry 2. I really wish they would have kept the same graphics engine as Crysis and made it very similar. The biggest mistake they made was creating their own graphics engine. This should have been a Crysis 3 just labeled Fry Cry 2.

First disappointment:
There aren't very many control options like melee attack and so on. You also have to hold the right mouse button to aim your sights. The controls are very simple and almost too simple. When reconfiguring my controls to the way I liked it, I usually use the Enter key for going in and out of doors, picking things up and so on. They fricken wont let me use the ENTER key at all!!!!!! What the hell is that all about!!! That was the biggest disappointment right away and was a warning sign of things to come. So if I want to use my arrow keys instead of the w, a, s, and d configuration and I need to enter something, I have to reach all the way over to the "E" key. So I did reconfigure to the \ key just because its closer to the arrows to enter doors, guns, etc. They all worked except when I want to exit from a mounted GUN. I sill have to use the "E" key no matter what for some strange reason and this cannot be changed once again. So lame! I really feel they put this game out in a hurry and forgot a lot of helpful things. There are a lot of things and options to do in the game, but you can’t change the keys for some. I hate that and I feel like I am playing an arcade game at the arcade.

The graphics: I have everything max and its smoother and nice. I would have to say they are a step down from Crysis though. I am blown away with Crysis every time I play it and if Crysis is a 10, this would be an 8. This game actually really reminds me of the latest Soldier Of Fortune. Remember how that looked kinda cool at first and then totally sucked.

The movement and feel: Once again pretty disappointed with the feel and realism of moving around. For Crysis, you really feel like you are running, but in this I am once again reminded of early old first person shooters like Soldier of Fortune.

When shooting people, it is not as realistic as I thought it would be at all. The blood effects are lame and it looks like pink paint splattering out very similar to Soldier of Fortune. I also have to shoot the guys that aren't wearing bullet proof vests in the chest about two or three times. Oh man that is the biggest disappointment. You shoot a person in the heart in real life, he's going down either dead or paralyzed.

The Good. They do a good job of making you feel like you are the character. You can never see a third person view and you never leave your first person view to go from gun to gun, seat to seat, or anything else. They did a good job of making you feel like you only have a few things in your pocket and what you are carrying. I mostly got that feeling because there are so few key options in the main menu to change and use.

I have only played a few levels so far and will continue right now, but I just had too many complaints right away to let it go unsaid. I will give you more updates soon.

So far after playing Crysis and COD4 this game is not blowing my skirt up at all! It started to in the very beginning, but went limp as soon as I started a level. So far compared to those games I just mentioned, if those are 10's this is a 6.5. We will see. Maybe I just have to lower my expectations and get use to not being comfortable with my keys, graphics, realism, etc. Then it will be awesome. So I am going to try that.

More about : cry disappointed

October 22, 2008 10:30:53 PM

You are aware that Crysis and Far Cry 2 were made by two completely different developers right? And the reason Crysis feels and plays like Far Cry is because both share the same developer, while Far Cry 2 was developed by one of Ubisoft studios.

I don't have the game yet, so I'm speaking from past experiences here, but Ubisoft is known for making less than stellar games, so I wouldn't be surprised if this one was a letdown taking advantage of the Far Cry franchise.

Basically, don't bother comparing Far Cry 2 to Crysis, since Crysis IS the spiritual successor to Far Cry, while Far Cry 2 probably only has the name.
October 22, 2008 10:46:00 PM

I'm not a fan of Ubisoft, and Far Cry 2 isn't made by Crytek so it isn't a real sequel as emp said. Also, a lack of control options probably stems from the fact that this is a multi-platform release, and I doubt Ubisoft was as concerned about the PC version as they were the 360 and PS3 versions.
Related resources
October 23, 2008 12:06:51 AM

Yes I am aware that this is from a completely different developer. Just from watching the videos and playing and reading the reviews, it did seem very similar. In actuality, its nothing like it. The whole time I am playing it, I am becoming more and more board and trying to figure out ways to get my money back. I cant stand shooting the guys about 4 times and then they finally die. I hate that. I cant stress enough how unrealistic and stupid that is. Someone needs to make a realism mod and quick, because they missed it by a long shot on this one with the killing.

The weapons and sounds are cool though. That only holds my interest for a short time until I am shooting and shooting and they are still not falling down. Lame! These guns are filled with BB's
October 23, 2008 12:12:46 AM

Yep, original Far Cry and Crysis are both made by Crytek. Far Cry 2 is made by Ubisoft. As for graphics, at max settings, it won't be as good as Crysis because Ubisoft has to water it down enough to run on consoles, a daunting task that Crytek didn't have to deal with.
October 23, 2008 12:57:52 AM

I cant get over some of the goofy colors, someone please tell me this is my graphics card or monitor, but my monitor is showing bright reds and Greens and Purples on rocks and the ground

October 23, 2008 1:18:39 AM

Far Cry 2 rulez besides some minor graphic glitches for which we will get patches anyways.
October 23, 2008 1:35:30 AM

I enjoyed it, I will say it is much better than crysis in some ways (performance for one...) although overall not nearly as groundbreaking. it has some neat new features and combat in general is good (if a little frusturating, guns jam wayyyy to much) I will say a better comparison would not be far cry 2 vs. Crysis, but instead Far cry 2 vs. STALKER. the they are actually very similar gameplay wise
October 23, 2008 2:13:06 AM

I am glad, that some of you liked it, because I was beginning to feel sorry for the game. I just couldn't do it anymore. I couldn't handle the arcade feel of it. You are right we shouldn't compare to Crysis and I think Crysis and COD4 has spoiled me for good. So I had to take it back. Guess what though. I returned it for Warhead. Should be a good trade.
October 23, 2008 2:25:23 AM

Crysis **** sucked anyway. What a linear and boring fps. Great graphics though ! *sigh*

And guns jam so much cuz you get crappy custom rifles from afrika. If you buy them at a shop I'm pretty sure it's not as bad.
October 23, 2008 4:40:22 AM

Sounds like I made a good choice in not getting Far Cry 2 right away. I will wait till the price drops and/or enough people wine to up the DRM limit.
October 23, 2008 11:01:05 AM

I'm not sure if I completely dislike yet.....It feels worse than STALKER since the guy runs so slow and gets winded so quickly....

Weapon degradation is stupid in its current form. I had a New Mac 10 (from Gun Shop) degrade while not using it WTF?. I have lots of little complaints...that normally are just that, LITTLE. But this game has so many of them that they equate to several really big ones.

One thing I will not complain about...length of the game, I am impressed and annoyed at the same time. Other open world games are similar in that you get a mission...it takes forever to get to it because its on the other friggin side of the map....So no complaint specifically on length...

Oh well at least it runs ok....and the editor is cool, too bad its not for a better game.
October 23, 2008 11:06:24 AM

Spitfire7 said:


This game actually really reminds me of the latest Soldier Of Fortune. Remember how that looked kinda cool at first and then totally sucked.



OMG I was totally thinking that while I played..... and its called Payback.

I'm glad I never got it...it was definitely a budget game.

I'm starting to doubt if I will finish this game....even once.
October 23, 2008 11:14:32 AM

cliffro said:
OMG I was totally thinking that while I played..... and its called Payback.

I'm glad I never got it...it was definitely a budget game.

I'm starting to doubt if I will finish this game....even once.


You may be able to take it back if you hurry. If you do it right and quick enough they can possibly take it back as defective. Then its the managers call if he can put it back on your card or just give you store credit. When I took mine back I purchased and return all within probably 5 hours or so. The guy took it back as defective and put the money back on my card. Good luck. They should have just called this game Far Cry Payback.
October 23, 2008 11:35:39 AM

ik694 said:
I cant get over some of the goofy colors, someone please tell me this is my graphics card or monitor, but my monitor is showing bright reds and Greens and Purples on rocks and the ground


Check your GPU temp
October 23, 2008 11:37:41 AM

Mine never did that. The graphics and colors all looked pretty normal.
October 23, 2008 11:50:09 AM

I'll be picking it up today most likely, I'm not surprised, it's Ubi.. they took community made patches and redistributed them as their own.
October 23, 2008 11:58:22 AM

My GX2 has a lot of issues with the game: colors get messed up whenever a new scene loads, and the display driver crashes when i exit the game. Latest WHQL drivers. See sig for computer specs. Runs great on max settings though.
October 23, 2008 3:04:43 PM

Spitfire7 said:
I am glad, that some of you liked it, because I was beginning to feel sorry for the game. I just couldn't do it anymore. I couldn't handle the arcade feel of it. You are right we shouldn't compare to Crysis and I think Crysis and COD4 has spoiled me for good. So I had to take it back. Guess what though. I returned it for Warhead. Should be a good trade.


I am still making my opinion of the game and I dont expect this to change yours, but I thought I would point these few things out:

1.) It was never stated that Far Cry 2 would be realistic and the original was quite a "far cry" from it, so I am unaware of where this expectation came from.

2.)Call of Duty 4 is a very "arcady" shooter (i personally love it), but it seems that you arent truly wanting realism in gameplay, but more or less for people to die quickly when shot. Now even though this is a rare occasion remember that Curtis Jackson (50 cent) was shot 9 times and still lives to this day (that is more than double your complaint of 4 times in the game)...yes I know this is an extreme example, but still....

3.) If you want realism then move to a Tom Clancy game and then when it isnt realistic enough for you. Your complain about realism should hold more since that is the point of most of their games.

Now those are the only things I noticed about your complaints that stuck out. I actually was thinking the same thing about SoF, which is funny and I did laugh when I read that. Funny but sadly true. The game shows slight potential...I think after a patch or 2 and a driver update it could shine more, but could never be over a 7.5 or 8 out of 10 even though its metacritic score is far above that.

Question: Does yours or anyone elses mouse act somewhat funny (as in slow or maybe unresponsive and inaccurate) in the menu screen? Just curious... since mine seems to be doing this, but it is OK in the game. Hopefully a patch will help with some of the graphical glitches that have begun to annoy me. Unless of course it is my system causing the issue, which I doubt is the case. lol

Best,

3Ball
October 23, 2008 4:59:45 PM

3Ball said:
Question: Does yours or anyone elses mouse act somewhat funny (as in slow or maybe unresponsive and inaccurate) in the menu screen? Just curious... since mine seems to be doing this, but it is OK in the game. Hopefully a patch will help with some of the graphical glitches that have begun to annoy me. Unless of course it is my system causing the issue, which I doubt is the case. lol

Best,

3Ball


Yeah mine does that too in the menus, does fine in the game though.
October 23, 2008 5:07:01 PM

3Ball said:

Question: Does yours or anyone elses mouse act somewhat funny (as in slow or maybe unresponsive and inaccurate) in the menu screen? Just curious... since mine seems to be doing this, but it is OK in the game. Hopefully a patch will help with some of the graphical glitches that have begun to annoy me. Unless of course it is my system causing the issue, which I doubt is the case. lol


YES! i was changing my mouse sensetivity 1st thing. It was annoying and made me feel like I should have a bigger mouse pad. But in the game it's fine.

Why is everyone busting on this game? I personally like it and is a refreshing change to COD4 or Crysis. The Crysis single player is nice, until you start with the Aliens just like FarCry (the original one) with the Monsters, then it's ruined. I like FarCry2's feel, there are less functions but adds to the simplicity of the game and lets you concentrate on other things. The red hue to everything is really what it is like in Africa, the colors that is. The Multipayer is sweet, I like that there is no radar and no real HUD. No fancy upgrades or abilities, just shoot the dude you see. I also like that you can't prone. At first I thought this was stupid, especially when assigning my mouse buttons, but in Multi I soon found out this was nice to eliminate those annoying campers. I mean there are so many plants, trees, and obsticles to hide near and behind you dont have to lay down, you wouldn't see anything. But i think it makes it hard for someone to camp all game and snipe people. I hate camping snipers.
October 23, 2008 7:52:08 PM

I agree totally with the spitfire dude...
Farcry 2 does not give us what you might believe if you see the trailers and so..
Crysis plays much nicer, and even with a much higher fps...
I have a intel quad-core with 2 8800GTS 320 and sometimes Farcry has even jerky gameplay, and if you look at the graphics, this is totally stupid....
Realistic my ass, it's damn right ugly, the mouselook is also terrible..
luckily there's enough ammo so you can get everybody down, only it will cost you a hell of a lot on bullets...

they just didn't get it right, and don't give us that crap that it was written for xbox and ps3, cause Mass Effect is also a beaty on the pc, so it can be easily done...and they used the unreal2 engine...dunia should be a lot better if you have to believe the programmers..

i cant enable AA, cause the game will crash, getting it to work took me for about an hour, how can they release a game like this...it's not finished by a long shot...

I hope that they write a big overhaulin patch quickly, i feel robbed right now..

October 23, 2008 9:01:33 PM

3Ball said:
I am still making my opinion of the game and I dont expect this to change yours, but I thought I would point these few things out:

1.) It was never stated that Far Cry 2 would be realistic and the original was quite a "far cry" from it, so I am unaware of where this expectation came from.

2.)Call of Duty 4 is a very "arcady" shooter (i personally love it), but it seems that you arent truly wanting realism in gameplay, but more or less for people to die quickly when shot. Now even though this is a rare occasion remember that Curtis Jackson (50 cent) was shot 9 times and still lives to this day (that is more than double your complaint of 4 times in the game)...yes I know this is an extreme example, but still....

3.) If you want realism then move to a Tom Clancy game and then when it isnt realistic enough for you. Your complain about realism should hold more since that is the point of most of their games.

Now those are the only things I noticed about your complaints that stuck out. I actually was thinking the same thing about SoF, which is funny and I did laugh when I read that. Funny but sadly true. The game shows slight potential...I think after a patch or 2 and a driver update it could shine more, but could never be over a 7.5 or 8 out of 10 even though its metacritic score is far above that.

Question: Does yours or anyone elses mouse act somewhat funny (as in slow or maybe unresponsive and inaccurate) in the menu screen? Just curious... since mine seems to be doing this, but it is OK in the game. Hopefully a patch will help with some of the graphical glitches that have begun to annoy me. Unless of course it is my system causing the issue, which I doubt is the case. lol

Best,

3Ball


Wow, I never knew 50 cent was so lucky. That can only be explained by a miracle which in a game if everyone is receiving miracles all the time, that's no fun and then whats the point in using guns. Here's the thing too though. No one, unless by a miracle, can be shot with a 50. machine gun in the chest and live to tell the tail. Well, there were two very lucky soldiers in FC2 yesterday that miraculously survived this traumatic incident, so I had to go up close to them and put them out of their misery with my 9mm pistol because my 50. cal wasn't cutting it. I also got a guy in the head, but he did get away to tell the tail.
October 23, 2008 9:18:04 PM

Whatever happened to the "completely destructible" environments?

Quote:
Destructible environment — No more obstacles: Everything is breakable and alterable, even in Multiplayer mode. The DUNIA engine's RealTree technology also delivers the most realistic nature deterioration system ever.


That is complete BS. I know FC2 is completely separate from Crysis but the comparisons are inevitable. So to make a claim like that about the destructible environments and have the actual product be so inferior to what Crysis offers is just dumb.
Examples: After getting to the first safe house I wanted to try some of the this out. So I go out side and see a pile of logs. First I try hitting them with the machete. One or two logs from the top fall off and nothing else. Then I start shooting, nothing else even moves. Then a grenade, nothing else moves. So I back up and fire the rocket launcher and the pile remains in tact.
So now I walk over to the car. Fire away few rounds into the windshield and get some decals but no broken glass. I go around to the side and open up on the side of the car. A few more decals and the door pops open but no real damage. Then I unload my side arm into the front tire. Every single bullet bounces off and the tire remains good as new. As I walk away from the vehicle in disgust I realize that within the couple minutes of doing all this the bullet "holes" in the windshield have disappeared and the glass is crystal clear.
While walking around the wooded areas I've tried repeatedly to hack away at the vegetation with the machete but to no avail, the brush is nothing more than scenery.

I've just started playing and I think it can be fun but I definitly think Ubisoft came up short of the expectations they laid out. And despite this game having no real relation to either Far Cry or Crysis, those are still going to be the obvious measuring rods for this game and Far Cry 2 will suffer for that. Maybe the game will be ok, but we'll all be left wondering how much better this game would have been had the same concept been used but with a better engine - like oh say, Crytek's?
October 23, 2008 10:47:11 PM

Hell, Epic originally claimed that the first Gears of War would have fully destructible environments, and look how far from the truth that was. :pt1cable: 
October 23, 2008 10:50:45 PM

Heyyou27 said:
Hell, Epic originally claimed that the first Gears of War would have fully destructible environments, and look how far from the truth that was. :pt1cable: 


purplerat said:
Whatever happened to the "completely destructible" environments?

Quote:
Destructible environment — No more obstacles: Everything is breakable and alterable, even in Multiplayer mode. The DUNIA engine's RealTree technology also delivers the most realistic nature deterioration system ever.


That is complete BS. I know FC2 is completely separate from Crysis but the comparisons are inevitable. So to make a claim like that about the destructible environments and have the actual product be so inferior to what Crysis offers is just dumb.
Examples: After getting to the first safe house I wanted to try some of the this out. So I go out side and see a pile of logs. First I try hitting them with the machete. One or two logs from the top fall off and nothing else. Then I start shooting, nothing else even moves. Then a grenade, nothing else moves. So I back up and fire the rocket launcher and the pile remains in tact.
So now I walk over to the car. Fire away few rounds into the windshield and get some decals but no broken glass. I go around to the side and open up on the side of the car. A few more decals and the door pops open but no real damage. Then I unload my side arm into the front tire. Every single bullet bounces off and the tire remains good as new. As I walk away from the vehicle in disgust I realize that within the couple minutes of doing all this the bullet "holes" in the windshield have disappeared and the glass is crystal clear.
While walking around the wooded areas I've tried repeatedly to hack away at the vegetation with the machete but to no avail, the brush is nothing more than scenery.

I've just started playing and I think it can be fun but I definitly think Ubisoft came up short of the expectations they laid out. And despite this game having no real relation to either Far Cry or Crysis, those are still going to be the obvious measuring rods for this game and Far Cry 2 will suffer for that. Maybe the game will be ok, but we'll all be left wondering how much better this game would have been had the same concept been used but with a better engine - like oh say, Crytek's?


Now that's just unfair. You have to realize that Ubisoft has to dumb it down so it'll run on consoles. Crytek didn't need to deal with this because their game is PC only. Consoles lack the raw power needed to give significant physics effects. Xbox360 runs on ATI Xeno gpu (equivalent of x1900) which don't accelerate physics effects, and a triple core IBM variant Xeon cpu (equivalent of early generation downclocked and crippled server Xeon), which isn't powerful enough to run physics. What Far Cry 2 had now is truly impressive, given the huge handicaps. The amount of console optimizations Ubisoft had to do in order to make it run must have been massive. You should give credit where credit is due.
October 24, 2008 12:01:02 AM

How the hell is that unfair when the quote I posted came directly from the Steam page advertising the game today?

again:
Quote:
Destructible environment — No more obstacles: Everything is breakable and alterable, even in Multiplayer mode. The DUNIA engine's RealTree technology also delivers the most realistic nature deterioration system ever.

Not only is that a blatant lie, but knowing what it will be compaired to and still spinning that BS is just plain stupid. If they had to dumb it down for consoles and weren't willing to put in the extra work for PCs then fine. I still probably would have played it but why just flat out lie and try to make the game out to be something it isn't. I just hope that word about this gets around fast in the PC gaming world. If there's a PC gamer out there interested in a game with the features described above, go buy Crysis Warhead for $20 less.
October 24, 2008 1:01:03 AM

purplerat said:
How the hell is that unfair when the quote I posted came directly from the Steam page advertising the game today?

again:
Quote:
Destructible environment — No more obstacles: Everything is breakable and alterable, even in Multiplayer mode. The DUNIA engine's RealTree technology also delivers the most realistic nature deterioration system ever.

Not only is that a blatant lie, but knowing what it will be compaired to and still spinning that BS is just plain stupid. If they had to dumb it down for consoles and weren't willing to put in the extra work for PCs then fine. I still probably would have played it but why just flat out lie and try to make the game out to be something it isn't. I just hope that word about this gets around fast in the PC gaming world. If there's a PC gamer out there interested in a game with the features described above, go buy Crysis Warhead for $20 less.


I went and bought Crysis Warhead after taking FC2 back and it was a way better decision.
October 24, 2008 1:05:20 AM

I bought it an am not into it... I gues i am spoiled by Crysis and COD 4. Game reminds me of Zelda meets Grand Theft Auto. Kinda G^Y thinking but it does. Hey I am getting flahing white dots while playing any ideas?
October 24, 2008 1:19:04 AM

ik694 said:
I cant get over some of the goofy colors, someone please tell me this is my graphics card or monitor, but my monitor is showing bright reds and Greens and Purples on rocks and the ground


I had same problem. I'm using 4870 on Vista 64 with catalyst 8.9. I only get the spots in DX10. I reverted back to 8.10 because I couldn't see my high def movies playing back any more. Hopefully 8.11 fixes that.

About the game, it seems like a straight up console port to me. The map was not designed like a pc game. It seems real flat and it keeps you in the valleys. The shooting doesn't seem all that great either. Hopefully the story and mission will help make up for some of the short falls.

BTW since it seems like it was designed for a console I was playing on the lcd tv with a xbox 360 controller. Half Life 2 Episode 2 greatly outshines playing the game the same way. I think a good deal of the pc magazines and web sites were a little generous with this game's rating.
October 24, 2008 4:57:07 AM

I read a thread about FC2 that for all nVidia GPU's they require a brand new update. NVidia was aware of this and actually created a new driver that worked for this game. I thought my drivers were all up to date, but when I installed the game I got a warning message saying my drivers were not for that game. So over to EVGA graphics drivers and got the latest one and everything worked perfectly. So apparently its looking like a lot if not most cards will need the latest update made for FC2.
October 24, 2008 12:31:23 PM

You think the Sp is bad wait till you try the MP!
October 24, 2008 2:58:44 PM

And then people wonder why Piracy is running rampant... why the hell are they doing limited installation DRM on this PoS? I have seen better games come free in boxes of cereal.

Is it just me, or does anyone else feel the graphics have a "Cartoony" feel to them?

The trees look great, the shadows look great, but the character models and lighting look like they are made out of clay and that "Realistic Fire" is some of the worst I have seen in a game yet.

And this is with EVERYTHING turned up on max, including fire, trees and physics.
October 24, 2008 3:37:27 PM

I can't even get far cry 2 to work, because it keep telling me that my activation has failed. It also appears that I am not alone with this, as I found out when I visted the far cry 2 official Forum. It appears to be a problem with their activation servers currently. Ubisoft have really mucked this up big time! I hope I can play soon.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/frm/f/1521068375

It's well know that the pirates find ways round this sercurity, but game companies punish legitimate users with this rubbish!

God I'm angry :fou: 
October 24, 2008 3:55:10 PM

Make sure to use "-" in the serial key input field. It's not divided into sections nor does it automatically insert hyphens (which apparently are critical to the key working). To me that was the first clue as to how lazy the programmers were in making this title for the PC. They couldn't even get the serial key input field right.
October 24, 2008 4:07:49 PM

Ubisoft is garbage.

Seems every game they put out lately is full of bugs.

I had so many problems with Rainbow Six Vegas 2 that I returned it.

I was looking forward to FC2 hoping it was being developed by Crytek. I was a little disappointed to find out Ubisoft was doing it. At that point I decided to wait for some of the reviews before purchasing it.

I guess I made the right decision. The vast majority of the comments have been negative.

I guess I can skip this title.
October 24, 2008 4:13:08 PM

I just saw that PC Gamer is going to give FarCry 2 a 94%.

If they've screwed their readers yet again by giving an epic score to a mediocre game I'm done with that magazine for good.
October 24, 2008 4:56:25 PM

WOW !!! And i thought that the Ubisoft forums were bad,though I must agree with the general consensus Ubisoft missed the mark on this one ,and, I do not think that any kind of patching will ever fix this turkey, maybe in time there will be some user maps that will make it worthwhile but,not at $50.00 for the game it just ain't worth it,btw I have personally known a few real life mercs ,and not one of them is under 30 and had a regular military rank of less that master sargent or equivalent..What a waste..:) 
October 24, 2008 5:00:13 PM

Well you're done with that magazine for sure then. I didn't want to pass judgment on it until I got some time playing the game, but I just can't get into the game, the combat interface doesn't feel right for a shooter. And what the hell is up with those "missions", this game makes me feel like it's Grand Theft Auto in Africa with a First Person view, not Far Cry.

The OP might be slightly disappointed, but I am EXTREMELY disappointed, this game doesn't do the Far Cry name justice in any aspect, to me it feels clunky, geared towards a console style of gameplay, and without a substantial story.
October 24, 2008 5:08:09 PM

Do you think that pc gamer had to give a good score for having the exclusive because I subcribe and this game is no way 94% maybe mid 80s I'd say.It makes me mad because I got this on their recommendation.
October 24, 2008 5:12:48 PM

Ananan said:
I just saw that PC Gamer is going to give FarCry 2 a 94%.

If they've screwed their readers yet again by giving an epic score to a mediocre game I'm done with that magazine for good.


Which PCG is that? UK? They gave Warhead a 60-something I think.

Ok, enough with the negativity! I'm picking it up in a few hours and I feel like ****. I need something to play for a few days until Fallout 3 this tuesday!

(I will probably add rants tomorrow morning :pt1cable:  )
October 24, 2008 5:17:21 PM

You guys are missing the point. Far Cry 2 is the most beautiful game yet for consoles. It's garbage only by PC standards. Your expectations were too high. This is a console game designed for kids that only know how to plug in a video game box into a TV, not a PC title designed for real gamers that know how to use a computer. :p 
October 24, 2008 5:31:12 PM

I guess you're right, even though I knew Ubisoft can't possibly make a good game, I was sorta expecting that maybe... sorta...possibly... they'd make something that would at least mirror the original Far Cry.

I don't think I'll play that GTA-esque Shooter piece of junk any time soon, but I am definitely putting my hopes up for Fallout 3 and Left 4 Dead :)  Those two are sure not to disappoint.
October 24, 2008 8:47:08 PM

stemnin said:
Which PCG is that? UK? They gave Warhead a 60-something I think.

Ok, enough with the negativity! I'm picking it up in a few hours and I feel like ****. I need something to play for a few days until Fallout 3 this tuesday!

(I will probably add rants tomorrow morning :pt1cable:  )



Warhead a 60 and FC2 a 94????? That magazine is stupid!!! I thought Warhead at the beginning was slightly different and graphics were slightly decreased, but then I got into the frozen water's levels, the caves, and so on and am completely blown away again. I almost just want to walk around and enjoy the scenery because these things are so beautiful lol, yeah I'm a dork I know lol.

STILL DISAPPOINTED WITH FC2 THOUGH! Very sad, very sad.
October 24, 2008 9:40:42 PM

Yeah, if I had a PC Gamer subscription I would cancel it over this. FC 2 is a console game. It wasn't designed with the PC in made. That game is not in same league for a PC game as Half Life games, Bioshock, Call of Duty, etc. The best FPS games are always designed for PC, and this game wasn't. I'll definitely give it some more time, but I am having a little buyer's remorse. Hopefully Fallout 3 will be much better, it probably will since bethesda is a long time PC developer.

Someone said the graphics were cartoony. You're right they are. The grass and envirnoment look ok, but some of the textures are junk, especially the cars.
October 24, 2008 10:20:33 PM

San Pedro said:
Yeah, if I had a PC Gamer subscription I would cancel it over this. FC 2 is a console game. It wasn't designed with the PC in made. That game is not in same league for a PC game as Half Life games, Bioshock, Call of Duty, etc. The best FPS games are always designed for PC, and this game wasn't. I'll definitely give it some more time, but I am having a little buyer's remorse. Hopefully Fallout 3 will be much better, it probably will since bethesda is a long time PC developer.

Someone said the graphics were cartoony. You're right they are. The grass and envirnoment look ok, but some of the textures are junk, especially the cars.


Fallout 3 should be somewhat on mark, despite available on Xbox360 as well as PC. It's designed with PC as a starting point, only included console for more profit, using scaled back graphics and physics. A PC game ported to console, not a console game ported to PC. The problem with Far Cry 2 is that every effort was made to make sure PC and console versions are identical. Cross-platform games that didn't suck also had the PC version offering heavier graphics at max settings than console versions. CoD4, for example, provides far heavier texture AF and depth field options for PC version.
October 24, 2008 11:10:50 PM

Hey Dagger any world if GTA4 will have better graphics and be better for PC? I heard about several new online options for the PC version, but like you were saying, have you heard at all if us PC guys will be having this same issue with GTA4? I have very high expectations for it, any world on if us PC guys will be as broken hearted as we were with FC2? I was impressed with GTA3, GTA SA, and I have a feelings I will be with #4 too.
October 25, 2008 1:49:38 AM

Oh thank heavens,

I started to feel guilty when I stopped playing after the opening shoot out at the hotel. I was expecting some kind of amazing graphics with it all cranked up and everything enabled. I was expecting some great sound effects, some really cool scenes, and some action. Instead, it started out so incredibly weak. I mean, you get to select a `dude' from a list. Then you are just driving some where and talking with a really stupid cab driver. It felt so much like they all played COD4 and thought "what a cool way to introduce the character and game!" and then turned around and failed at trying to recreate that. Instead of the scene and landscape looking like the videos I remember (orangy skies, very vibrant, etc), it was just all kinds of brown and some blue sky. Really lame and bland looking. The lighting was so completely washed out too. There were no dark places that were `kinda' dark. Just really light, and really hidden. That's just crappy. The story, well, you're at the hotel, something happened, you meet the guy, he's like some Don Juan looking dude straight out of GQ with a knife. And he lets you live? Why? Pfft. Next you fight at the hotel to escape. You faint. You end up captured and you meet someone who looks like a teenager. He's totally trusting and just standing there like you couldn't just kill him since you're totally surprised and found yourself in a new strange place. What. The. Crap. Dialog? Terrible. The opening dialog explaining the situation? Terrible.

Crysis is a poor game. It looks freaking unreal. But it's a poor ass game.

This game both looks like balls and is LESS playable than Crysis.

Holy Crap.

Montreal is sucking when it comes to throwing out games.... I'm glad I moved away from there back to Florida. *Sigh*

Ok... on to looking forward to Dead Space & Fallout 3.

Cheers,
October 25, 2008 6:16:02 AM

i really hate the color. i mean, cant they just add more life to the color?? its not like the color will cause performance drop or somthing rite?
October 25, 2008 7:28:07 AM

Well I didn't have a good comp for years so I didn't play much of crysis until recently. I also played a bit of FarCry when it first released and I thought it was stunning.

FC2 tried hard to make things realistic but I think they've over exaggerated some of the stuff. As mentioned before even at point blank I had to load an entire clip from my machine gun to kill him which is totally ridiculous. I find that walking takes too long (the map is way too big). Although you're given a vehicles to drive, you can't control the gun while you're driving so in SP it makes you pretty defenseless (you can't even stick out your gun like the gansters do for drive by). The most annoying part for me is the malaria which happened a lot during the beginning (before meeting up with that guy at church to get my pills). I kept fainting and having to restart my mission. They've also given hints on how to tell if a gun is likely to jam or not but I failed to see any physical difference =/

I like their effects and well their graphics isn't 100% the best but I must say it is still respectable. I agree about the blood looking like paint lol... I thought that was pretty funny. One thing I noticed as I try to enjoy the scenary is that there's always this layer of fog hanging around the area and I'm not sure if that's intended on purpose?

The dialogs also seem very onesided. Most of the time the guys there are answering for you and you (the character) actually don't have a lot of stuff to say in return.

I haven't had issues with gun jamming (it only happened once for me at this point), but I find the battle system rather difficult. It's very hard for me to locate where my enemies are (I'm getting shot out of nowhere) and there's really no place for me to find proper cover and get healed (they just hammer you until you die unless you've already cleared out half of them in the area).

I've also wondered why if they've built a GPS to help us navagate that they don't allow us to mark our destination so that we can follow a path (i would imagine it'll draw a path on the map) and navagate easier instead of having to pull out the map (while driving) which covers a lot of your viewable area.

The running is bad because you can only sprint for a bit and you don't run very quick in the game so if you're trying to escape life gets twice as hard. Your stamina is also extremely weak so it makes you walk most of the time. You'll probably find yourself walking more than anything else.

If I was to say one good thing about this game is their environment system. I liked how weather changes dynamically as well as animals reacting to you. Although I've only seen deers so far I hope to see more animals.

Overall I'd say this game deserves an 8. I have to give them credit for improving system performance but the design is still lacking a bit.
!