This topic is locked from further discussion.
its worth getting just for the map editiorlm2fno coop made me not buy it. that game could have been godly if it was given an online coop feature, some variation in difficulty, and some quick save points.
Respawning enemies and too much focus on the little details. I don't care about watching myself pull a bullet out of my leg when the voice acting is terribleandtheytalkreallyfast.
what? no one is even there to play on your maps, and the editor isn't even that advanced. sandbox 2.0 is much better
as for the sp, fc2 is just WAY too repetitive. I'm just glad i didn't have to pay for it, it came with my gtx 260
Because traveling in that game makes you want to track down the game developers and run them off the road every five minutes?Vandalvideo
I cannot understand why everybody hates the driving in this game so much... I mean, I can understand all the complaints about the "antiquated" gunplay, the repetetive missions, respawning enemies, etc. but I just don't get why people hate the driving so much. You can drive from one corner of the map to the other in 5 minutes, and you can avoid almost every single checkpoint/enemy on the way...
[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"]Because traveling in that game makes you want to track down the game developers and run them off the road every five minutes?MetroidPrimePwn
I cannot understand why everybody hates the driving in this game so much... I mean, I can understand all the complaints about the "antiquated" gunplay, the repetetive missions, respawning enemies, etc. but I just don't get why people hate the driving so much. You can drive from one corner of the map to the other in 5 minutes, and you can avoid almost every single checkpoint/enemy on the way...
Because when driving an assault jeep with poor physics towards another checkpoint with respawning enemies hellbent on seeing you dead, yet another jeep patrol pops up in front of you, forcing you to man the turret and jump out to repair for the 48th time, you realize that when you finally reach your objective on the other end of the map, you have to go all the way back again.There is nothing about it that's even close to resembling any sort of fun. When you're not asking yourself if you're there yet you want to punch your screen in the face, hoping Ubisoft feels it. Buses help somewhat.
only thing i hate is the respawning enemy posts, and the constant random attacks, and too much driving, other than that, the game is awesome. I think most people have become used to linear, "COD4" type shooters, so when you play far cry 2, its going to seem boring. I think that if it had a fast travel system like fallout 3, where once you visit an area, you can fast travel close to it, but not actually there, then the game would be more accessable to everybody. Either that, or they shouldve added some RPG elements so your guy can level up or something, then it would make the slow pace make sense.navyguy21What they should've done is
Why do you guys hate driving? You could just take a bus you know. Or walk. Mario2007You still have to drive to one of the corners of the map to take a bus
[QUOTE="MetroidPrimePwn"]Because when driving an assault jeep with poor physics towards another checkpoint with respawning enemies hellbent on seeing you dead, yet another jeep patrol pops up in front of you, forcing you to man the turret and jump out to repair for the 48th time, you realize that when you finally reach your objective on the other end of the map, you have to go all the way back again.[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"]
I cannot understand why everybody hates the driving in this game so much... I mean, I can understand all the complaints about the "antiquated" gunplay, the repetetive missions, respawning enemies, etc. but I just don't get why people hate the driving so much. You can drive from one corner of the map to the other in 5 minutes, and you can avoid almost every single checkpoint/enemy on the way...
InsaneBasura
There is nothing about it that's even close to resembling any sort of fun. When you're not asking yourself if you're there yet you want to punch your screen in the face, hoping Ubisoft feels it. Buses help somewhat.
only thing i hate is the respawning enemy posts, and the constant random attacks, and too much driving, other than that, the game is awesome. I think most people have become used to linear, "COD4" type shooters, so when you play far cry 2, its going to seem boring. I think that if it had a fast travel system like fallout 3, where once you visit an area, you can fast travel close to it, but not actually there, then the game would be more accessable to everybody. Either that, or they shouldve added some RPG elements so your guy can level up or something, then it would make the slow pace make sense.navyguy21What they should've done is
you shouldnt be playing if you need to drive from one side of the map to the other, and instead of being attacked would you like if better if there isnt a soul to be seen for 2 miles and the guard posts are all empty?
which is not even that much drivinglm2fFor every mission, yes it is. You still have to drive from the bus station to the mission as well. Also I did beat Mile High on Veteran.
[QUOTE="lm2f"]its worth getting just for the map editiorPanther501no coop made me not buy it. that game could have been godly if it was given an online coop feature, some variation in difficulty, and some quick save points. there is something called quick save which lets you save anywhere but yeah coop would have made the game so much better.
Because traveling in that game makes you want to track down the game developers and run them off the road every five minutes?Vandalvideobut doing the same thing in gta4 is somehow fun? it is just as boring as all the driving round you do in any gta game.
you shouldnt be playing if you need to drive from one side of the map to the other, and instead of being attacked would you like if better if there isnt a soul to be seen for 2 miles and the guard posts are all empty?
lm2f
It doesn't matter whether you have to drive from one end of the map to the other or not. No matter what you will be driving a lot and for long distances in Far Cry 2, and it is not fun for the reasons I mentioned and you chose to ignore.
Unlike what you seem to believe, it's not having enemies constantly shoved in your face, or no enemies at all. It is possible to have a middle ground there, other shooters and open world games have proven this. These aren't enemies which you seek out, they come hunting for you, They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead. That is the problem, not that they're there. That and they are not entertaining encounters that spice up the gameplay, they're repetitive annoyances which ruin the pacing and grow increasingly boring and frustrating. The jeep patrols in particular. Outposts can be dealt with differently, but rarely are as you're on your way to somewhere and these things are in the way.
[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"]Because traveling in that game makes you want to track down the game developers and run them off the road every five minutes?imprezawrx500
GTAIV would surely be a bit designed like ass too if you had a cop car appearing out of nowhere every three minutes, ramming into you and trying to kill you, shooting out your tyres so you had to stop and steal a new car. And a roadblock once every mile. For no reason whatsoever. And don't give me the "realism, it's a war zone" bs. This is a game. The realism card wouldn't work anyway. I think I mentioned the "you're driving the same jeep as the bloody factions, so why the hell would they fire on sight?" thing somewhere already. Then there's the fact that there is no actual war in this supposed war zone.
[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"]Because traveling in that game makes you want to track down the game developers and run them off the road every five minutes?imprezawrx500but doing the same thing in gta4 is somehow fun? it is just as boring as all the driving round you do in any gta game. Difference is in GTA4 you drive around what seems like a living breathing word. Far Cry 2's is magnificent to look at, but marred by the patrols, and checkpoints - and the world just feels like a hostile unexplorable one, that is annoying to traverse. Another problem is the vehicles arent that enjoyable to drive around in, compared to GTA. The physics seem a bit odd, and the speed of them has been slowed to cope with the on the fly loading.
Stalker had a gigantic world, no vehicles, and it still wasn't boring to walk.
Why?
Because GSC have talent. Stalker feels like a game made by true artists that have no idea how to program software, while FC2 feels like a game made by engineers that have no idea how to make something fun.
I like it, put a lot of time into the single player. It has some very annoying respawning enemies, and you travel around far to much in cars, but I love sniping people in the long grass and setting fire to crap. Online is ok, could be better, could be worse.
Overall I think it's a very solid 8/10. It has problems but they're not enough to ruin the game, but they shouldn't have been there in the first place, game could have been fantastic without them. The African setting is one of the best game worlds I've ever seen.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment