As if there were any doubt, Mr. Steerpike grabbed this game on Day Zero and has given it a solid four hours. Largely interesting because this is the first “big studio” open-world shooter, a format that’s been dominated until now by the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. games and nothing else, the question becomes: does Far Cry 2 deliver? Click to find out…
The obvious difference between Far Cry 2 and GSC Game World’s STALKER titles is apparent within about nine seconds of play: I’m talking polish, people. Polish. Whereas STALKER’s X-Ray Engine runs like an arthritic trilobyte on even very powerful machines, Far Cry 2’s brand-new and far more gorgeous Dunia Engine is averaging 50 FPS with all visuals maxed out in DirectX 10. This game makes aggressive use of however many processor cores you may have, and does well with modern videocards. The intentionally reminiscent of Half Life opening sequence does a great job of displaying an engine that easily takes place alongside Crysis’s Cry2 Engine, except Dunia is beautifully optimized and runs better than I could have imagined.
Play-wise, I’m a little too early into the game to say for sure, but so far I’ve not become engrossed in the world and missions the way I was with the STALKER games. Far Cry 2 is a shooter that happens to have an open world; “shooter” is foremost in its classification. STALKER is an open-world-shooter-RPG, and it’s intriguing to see the differences up close and personal, having played Clear Sky so close to Far Cry 2. Basically, this game is much more IN YOUR FACE than STALKER ever was. There is less opportunity for precision and forethought, and much more action. Enemies and gun battles are regular events, while exploration and self-improvement take a backseat role.
Another interesting fact: Ubi dodged the racism accusations that Capcom is currently enduring with Resident Evil 5 by simply making most of the mercenaries and enemies in this game white. While Far Cry 2 takes place in war-torn central Africa, so far the only Africans I’ve seen are in positions of power, and not yet involved in gunplay. Given that conflict diamonds form a crucial fulcrum of the story, it may not be that unrealistic… but it is worth noting.
Combat is solid, difficulty is even, enemy AI could be better but isn’t disastrous. Basically I find myself wishing that this game included a bunch of stuff that was done in Clear Sky, and wishing that Clear Sky had included a bunch of stuff done in this game. So far: guarded positivity, but no sheer joy yet.
Stay tuned for more.
One of the best things about having a loving spouse and fun-to-be-around children is that eventually they go on holidays together, and I can get some peace and quiet ant have a brief gaming frenzy.
I bought the Orange Box, Mass Effect, Crysis Warhead, GTR-Evolution, and Far Cry 2. Sorry, no World in Conflict 🙂 and the Stalker train never left the station this time.
Of them all, I’d say Mass Effect is the most compelling despite being extremely hard. The game lures you into twitch action responses when a more strategic approach is necessary.
Far Cry 2 is really a pretty game. I’ve got about 4 hours in the game as well, and find the pace a little bit slow and the entire concept a bit strange. I get jobs from each of two factions who, on the surface, appear that they should oppose each other, but their HQ’s are in the same town. Why don’t my missions for one group cause me to fall into disrepute with the other group? Why did I have to wipe out 1/2 of the town the first time I arrived only to be greeted like a lost brother once I got to the groups inside? I need a little bit more background information that what seems to be provided in the game.
I’ve read about the checkpoints and jeep patrols and this could be a dealbreaker. I took a mission on the far bottom part of the map and had to face 5 of the rabid jeep patrols to get there and back.
The mechanics were always the same. Narrow road, no maneuverability, fast racing jeep comes careening around a corner to smash into you head on, followed by 20 seconds of intense 50cal back and forth between parties, with the inevitable healing and wrench in the engine compartment animation afterwards. On 2 occasions while I was repairing the jeep, another jeep piled in from the back. Rinse, repeat.
Oh no, you can’t run away either. Rip through a checkpoint camp without stopping (since I’ve read they repopulate anyway) and you’ll hear a jeep start up, then the bullets fly and with 1 or 2 hits my jeep starts to smoke and slow down, resulting in the above scenario played out from behind.
I have an amd athlon 3800+ oc’d to 4400+ and an 8800GT and it’s playable (40+ fps) on middish level settings. I had to dial back to 1200×900 but it’s still the prettiest game I’ve seen given my h/w. Crysis Warhead notwithstanding. It’s nice to see both cores used to 90% as well, although Mass Effect also seems to use both processors as well.
The checkpoints and jeep patrols are really annoying, and it’s exactly as Helmut describes them. I think it’s a somewhat inept attempt to make sure that there’s not a long break between gun battles, but since it’s always the same it comes off as quite repetitive. And yes, checkpoints do in fact respawn. Very irritating.
I too haven’t grasped what’s going on in the game world. I need to spend another several hours to see if I can get my head around the storyline. All in all it’s a beautiful game, but I miss the precision and self-improvement (and sense of forward progress) of the STALKERs.
Far Cry 2 looks amazing on the PS3 and the game play is good but I would have prefered a HUD display to shithouse GPS and map system.
Hi Andy, welcome to the site!
My current reaction to FC2 is one of vague irritation and disappointment, due to minor annoyances that build up to damage the game experience as a whole. The aforementioned endless security checkpoints and relentless jeep patrols are a major problem, as is the inability to repair weapons as they degrade. Also, I can’t find info on weapons in the arms dealer computer – no indication of what’s better than what. Plus vehicles are a pain to drive and the repair mechanic is imbecilic.
I kind of like the GPS/map, but an onscreen compass would be nice, and a little more information on the HUD would have been welcome. All in all I feel like the game is very hard to make progress in, and for all that it claims 50+ hours for the single player storyline, my bet is that 43 of those hours are spent getting from place to place or fending off pointless encounters.
So far I’d recommend Clear Sky or the original STALKER over Far Cry 2 to anyone interested in an open world shooter – surprising, but true.
Really sceptical about getting this game after reading the “consumer” review’s on Metacritic.
It just looks like an open world just for the sake of open world , WITHOUT any sense of progression.
Is it REALLY open world to begin with?
Too many checkpoint’s , narrow canyons that connect settlement’s (where action takes place) , and the malaria gimmic that prevents you from going too far off the beaten track…..that’s the impression I got after reading the review’s.
Seems like a bad console port.
Yeah, it’s an open world, that’s its problem. You can go anywhere and do what you like when you get there, but the in-between parts ruin the experience. Constant jeep attacks and checkpoints means it takes an average of two hours to get to a mission destination; you’ll generally swap out vehicles six to eight times during the trek. Then you get there, spend five minutes doing a great, clever mission against an awesome set piece, then you’re back to driving again.
The system for buying and inventorying weapons is unbelievably jarring, the malaria gimmick is, as Amit said, just a gimmick. The AI makes Project IGI’s look good, and the graphics, while beautiful, are so stuffed full of trees and cacti and lianas that you can rarely get a good line of sight on anything.
HUGE disappointment – if I were reviewing it, which I won’t because I’d have to finish the craptastic thing, this’d be a Rotten Egg.
Seeing as the budget is blown for the fall and I can’t get Fallout 3, I am finding some ways to be happy here. Actually, I’ve started taking the bus and hoofing it across the land.
No death Jeeps ram the bus (‘scuse me, can you keep your child off the PKM, thanks?) and walking the last little bit gives you an appreciation for the countryside, which is still amazingly well done.
I’m getting a bit more gear and it’s starting to get a tiny bit more interesting. I splurged on a camo suit, and can now walk around most checkpoints without being spotted. There still is no indication that I’m making any progress of any kind in the game. The missions are entirely generic and could be done in any order whatsoever. Is there an ending to the game or does this continue randomly forever?
Still, I’ve come to kinda like it. It’s harmless, like thin chicken soup. Everyone likes chicken soup, eh?, and this way there’s enough left over for tomorrow.
I was really pumped up for this one and Clear Skies but guess I’ll just save my money for something really good comming out in the future…..something along the lines of the original FarCry , STALKER , Call of Juarez or even Crysis.
It appears that Quality Open world games just seem to be getting more and more difficult to make.
“Is there an ending to the game or does this continue randomly forever?”…..That’s the EXACT feeling I get when I see a open world game.
A engine that generates random missions but rarely doing anything more…….in terms of flow or connectivity with the actual game world or main storyline.
Actually the MISSIONS are not random – they’re specific and pretty good. It’s getting to them that’s the problem, with the constant Jeep attacks and endless checkpoints.
This game apparently does have a single-player storyline with a beginning, middle and end, but I hear it’ll take you 50 hours to get through it.
Helmut: your words intrigue me. Walk and take the bus. That’s not just convenient, it’s environmentally friendly. I may give it a try. My biggest complaints about the game stem from using the roads, so maybe if I don’t, the complaints will evaporate.
Amit: While I don’t regret the rating I gave Clear Sky, I am definitely looking at that game in a new light given the disappointing weaknesses of Far Cry 2. Everyone expected that a big, better-funded studio with more experience would be able to take the open world shooter crown, but instead they gave us essentially Assassin’s Creed in Africa: big and empty. Clear Sky is not without its flaws, but at $35 it’s a bargain, and at least as good as its predecessor. I’ll spare you a wordy review since I already reviewed it, but if you’re looking for a game in this format Clear Sky is probably your best bet.
i love video games since i was small
until these days and pc is costly in your pocket when its comes to upgrading. and a lot requirements to ask. and i think its better to play on console.