Does this game suck?

  • 51 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by jdh5153 (1034 posts) -

I watched the Far Cry 3 quick look and I really want to play it, so today I saw Far Cry 2 (360) at Gamestop for $6 and bought it...But the guy at the cash register told me not to lose the receipt because I'd want my money back by tomorrow.

Is it really that bad? Is it anything like what Far Cry 3 looks like? Is it really not even worth $6? Lastly, is playing Far Cry 2 important to understanding Far Cry 3?

#2 Posted by JasonR86 (9651 posts) -

No. It's really cool. It has some problems though. They checkpoint the openworld with enemies to the point where it can become really frustrating running around. But the shooting is good, the open nature of the fighting scenarios is fun, and I like the variety with which you could attack situations.

#3 Posted by believer258 (11775 posts) -

Far Cry, Far Cry 2, and Far Cry 3 have absolutely nothing to do with each other. All three are different in every way except an obsession with exotic, sunny locales.

And no, FC2 isn't a bad game. It's a weird game that has a few unlikeable quirks. But it's not a bad game overall.

Online
#4 Edited by jkz (4008 posts) -

A bad game? No, most certainly not. I didn't enjoy any of my time with it, but it's most definitely not a bad game, or anything close, really.

#5 Posted by jdh5153 (1034 posts) -

So I shouldn't necessarily put off Far Cry 3 until I play 2? Is there anything to learn from 2? Are the gameplay mechanics the same so that it would benefit me in 3 if I become familiar with 2?

#6 Posted by Spoonman671 (4588 posts) -

Far Cry 2 is great.  I don't know if there's much reason to play it now that Far Cry 3 is out.

#7 Posted by huntad (1930 posts) -

Far Cry 2 is a game that I've owned more than once and never finished. I find the shooting to be completely unsatisfying because of how inaccurate the guns are even when iron-sighted. I don't think it's a bad game, but one where you have to put up with some bad design decisions in order to find enjoyment. If it's cheaper than $10 it's worth a shot.

#8 Posted by M_Shini (551 posts) -

Its a love/hate thing, altho i would just play FC3 since there isn't any reason to play 2 before if that's why you bought it. Granted you might find it hard to go back to FC2 after FC3 partly because of other systems in place like fast travel.

#9 Posted by OneKillWonder_ (1720 posts) -

I wouldn't call it bad, in fact, I really enjoyed the one time I played through it. However, there are several things about it that absolutely suck and will most definitely keep you from enjoying it as much as you could be. It's worth $6 for sure.

#10 Posted by laserbolts (5317 posts) -

It's pretty awful yes. For 6 bucks though it might be worth it if you like it.

#11 Posted by jdh5153 (1034 posts) -

Sweet. I bought it on Steam during one of the sales a loooong time ago...But now I have a Mac and can't figure out how to dual boot Windows (I installed Windows 7 on another partition and it worked, however none of my drivers were there so it wouldn't recognize my network card or anything to connect to WiFi to get shit working :/).So anyway I'll play it on the 360 now.

#12 Posted by BaneFireLord (2918 posts) -

The world is fun to run around in, the attention to detail is staggering and the fire tech is really cool to screw around with. The respawning guards and the hostility of every single person in the world is pretty annoying. I enjoyed it, but I can see why people wouldn't.

#13 Posted by ArtisanBreads (3788 posts) -

I hated Far Cry 2. Seemed really promising but so many awful little mechanics and elements.

Also, I got a few hours in and ran into a glitch where I was supposed to get medicine from this guy in a shack for my Malaria (stupidest game idea ever perhaps?) and he just wouldn't give it to me. The game saved in the building I believe and only had one save slot. So my game was ruined hours in and I could progress no further.

#14 Posted by jdh5153 (1034 posts) -

@ArtisanBreads said:

I hated Far Cry 2. Seemed really promising but so many awful little mechanics and elements.

Also, I got a few hours in and ran into a glitch where I was supposed to get medicine from this guy in a shack for my Malaria (stupidest game idea ever perhaps?) and he just wouldn't give it to me. The game saved in the building I believe and only had one save slot. So my game was ruined hours in and I could progress no further.

Damn, that sucks. Was getting malaria part of the story, or can you just catch random diseases like in Fallout / The Elder Scrolls?

#15 Edited by ArtisanBreads (3788 posts) -

@jdh5153 said:

@ArtisanBreads said:

I hated Far Cry 2. Seemed really promising but so many awful little mechanics and elements.

Also, I got a few hours in and ran into a glitch where I was supposed to get medicine from this guy in a shack for my Malaria (stupidest game idea ever perhaps?) and he just wouldn't give it to me. The game saved in the building I believe and only had one save slot. So my game was ruined hours in and I could progress no further.

Damn, that sucks. Was getting malaria part of the story, or can you just catch random diseases like in Fallout / The Elder Scrolls?

No its part of the story. And all it makes you do is seek out the medication and you take it and you're better every so often. If you don't you keep falling over if I remember correctly and eventually die.

So it's just an errand to run.

I'll disagree but listen to defenses of some of the mechanics and design decisions in Far Cry 2 that people will throw out there, but the respawning check points, teleporting jeeps, and the malaria are just flat out dumb. I would love to hear why they were implemented from the developers.

#16 Posted by Jace (1092 posts) -

@jdh5153 said:

I watched the Far Cry 3 quick look and I really want to play it, so today I saw Far Cry 2 (360) at Gamestop for $6 and bought it...But the guy at the cash register told me not to lose the receipt because I'd want my money back by tomorrow.

Is it really that bad? Is it anything like what Far Cry 3 looks like? Is it really not even worth $6? Lastly, is playing Far Cry 2 important to understanding Far Cry 3?

Far Cry 2 was a DECENT game at best. It would've been playable except the outpost spawn mechanic broke the game. It just literally sucked all of the fun out of it.

#17 Posted by ProfessorEss (7309 posts) -

most people I know would say yes it is a bad game, but I thought it was brilliant.

#18 Posted by TheSouthernDandy (3848 posts) -

It doesn't suck at all but there are some baffling design decisions that ruined the game for me. Specifically respawning checkpoints. After stopping my jeep, jumping in the turret, mowing down 6 guys, repairing and continuing to my objective for about the 40th time I gave up. I tried playing it again recently and same thing happened. It's a shame cause aside from that the game is pretty amazing. But hey give it a shot that might not bother you.

#19 Edited by mordukai (7149 posts) -

Far Cry 2 doesn't suck, it's just that not a very good game, or I should say, not a very good game to follow Far Cry 1. The ideas and tech behind it were well put but they were not executed very well or in a way that would make a compelling game.

#20 Posted by murisan (1119 posts) -

When it came out, I had TONS of fun with it on the 360. But, that was when it came out. Since then, it's aged poorly IMO, the malaria mechanic is just fuckin' dumb, and I hate the gun jamming mechanic. Sure, guns jam, but not all of them, and not several times per fight. That being said, the fire system is quite amazing, but that's also in Far Cry 3.

To be honest, if you've not played Far Cry 2, I'd say DON'T play it and wait for Far Cry 3. FC3 will be even more eye-opening that way.

#21 Posted by Chaser324 (6394 posts) -

Far Cry 2 is a good game with a lot of irritating things that make you not want to play it. It sounds like Far Cry 3 carries over a lot of the cool stuff, removes some of the frustration, and has some far more interesting characters.

So, I'd recommend just not playing Far Cry 2. There's no continuity at all between the games, so you aren't missing out on anything that would add to the experience of Far Cry 3.

Moderator Online
#22 Edited by Godlyawesomeguy (6396 posts) -

I didn't enjoy my time with it at all but I certainly found it to be pleasantly ambitious and I can see why some people really love that game.

#23 Posted by RandomInternetUser (6789 posts) -

A lot of amazing ideas made into a kind of mediocre game with a a good chunk of issues, in my opinion. You can definitely get 6 bucks of enjoyment out of it.

#24 Posted by Subjugation (4719 posts) -

You don't need to play Far Cry 2 before you play Far Cry 3. That said, you don't stand to lose too much if you only paid $6. The game totally has potential. It has some great ideas and great tech behind it, but it all gets brought down by some poor game design decisions that are pretty universally maligned. The most common among these, from what I gather, is the annoyance of the guards and respawning outposts that make everything just plain tedious. It's definitely the aspect of the game that bothered me the most.

#25 Posted by Rave (370 posts) -

I hates Far cry 2 at first but after gettin past some of the rougher edges its now one of my favorite shooters. I actually own it on ps3 and 360.

The landscape is one that you rarely get to see in an fps. And I loved the chaos and sense of unease the gun jamming, malaria, and fire could cause in a fight. Most shooters you know what to expect and everything usually works out for you. In farcry 2 you can take all the procautions you and make all the best laid plans and have the mechanics screw you.

It constantly feels like you have to think on your toes and adapt to each situation as the battles evolve.

#26 Edited by TaliciaDragonsong (8698 posts) -

It has a few problems but it's good enough to warrant a 20 bucks purchase. Especially if you like this sort of game.
 
3 does it better however.

#27 Posted by Milkman (16618 posts) -

Yeah, it kind of does.

#28 Posted by spankingaddict (2660 posts) -

No . It's just not a "must play" game .

Online
#29 Posted by Turtlebird95 (2343 posts) -

I thought the campaign was terrible. The multiplayer was kinda fun with friends though checking out some of the cool maps. I mean somebody remade Ocarina of Time on it for fuck's sake.

#30 Posted by mbr2 (564 posts) -

If you want a unique video game experience then play FC2 if you want something that's like every other video game then play FC3. I don't get the common complaints about FC2. Respawing enemies? YOU'RE PLAYING AN FPS!!! Do you also complain about having to shoot stuff often when playing Doom? The other I see often is having to drive around to places. IT'S AN OPEN WORLD GAME!!!! What the fuck is the point of having an open world if you can skip across it like some motherfucking teleporting wizard? "Ugh! What is this? An open world where I have to traverse the world!?" People who hate FC2 clearly bought the wrong game.

#31 Posted by Demoskinos (14730 posts) -

Its an awful game. He was right.

#32 Posted by ArtisanBreads (3788 posts) -

@mbr2 said:

If you want a unique video game experience then play FC2 if you want something that's like every other video game then play FC3. I don't get the common complaints about FC2. Respawing enemies? YOU'RE PLAYING AN FPS!!! Do you also complain about having to shoot stuff often when playing Doom? The other I see often is having to drive around to places. IT'S AN OPEN WORLD GAME!!!! What the fuck is the point of having an open world if you can skip across it like some motherfucking teleporting wizard? "Ugh! What is this? An open world where I have to traverse the world!?" People who hate FC2 clearly bought the wrong game.

lol sure, you're right. I'm just an idiot.

#33 Edited by Potts (159 posts) -

@ArtisanBreads said:

@mbr2 said:

If you want a unique video game experience then play FC2 if you want something that's like every other video game then play FC3. I don't get the common complaints about FC2. Respawing enemies? YOU'RE PLAYING AN FPS!!! Do you also complain about having to shoot stuff often when playing Doom? The other I see often is having to drive around to places. IT'S AN OPEN WORLD GAME!!!! What the fuck is the point of having an open world if you can skip across it like some motherfucking teleporting wizard? "Ugh! What is this? An open world where I have to traverse the world!?" People who hate FC2 clearly bought the wrong game.

lol sure, you're right. I'm just an idiot.

+1

Respawning enemies are fine, if they don't respawn as soon as you look away or sneeze or something. And driving around would be fine if you didn't have to get out of your car every time some random enemy decides they want to shoot at you.

What got me about FC2 was that everyone on the island wanted you dead. For an open world game, it wasn't very realistic that people would shoot you on sight no matter where you went. Also, it didn't help that the AI could see you from 4 miles away, even if there were trees, deep grass, trucks, other enemies, buildings or hills in the way. For a game that promoted it's stealth element, it didn't really encourage the stealthy gameplay.

Don't take all that as me saying the game was bad - I still enjoyed it regardless of it's flaws. But the flaws it does have can be hard to ignore, and you may find yourself taking a lot more than expected just getting from point A to B (the save point is at B) because of the omniscient, endlessly respawning enemies.

#34 Posted by Jimbo (9796 posts) -

It's certainly one of the most divisive games around. Correct and handsome people think it's good and wrong idiots who are wrong about everything think it's bad.

#35 Posted by PeasantAbuse (5138 posts) -

It's worth $6, but definitely not the $60 I paid.

#36 Posted by imsh_pl (3295 posts) -

Don't understand the hate, I loved it. The ending twist was... questionable, but I liked the mechanics and even the characters.

#37 Posted by Zelyre (1169 posts) -

The Farcry games have nothing to do with one another.

In the first game, you're fighting people and then come across genetically altered monsters. More of a Jurassic Park "Lost World" kinda game.

The second game, I didn't care for much. Only made it a few hours in before I put it down. Neither the location nor the gameplay mechanics seemed to gel with me. Maybe I was expecting Far Cry 2 and not "Get blood diamonds in Africa to buy medicine shooter".

#38 Posted by Sooty (8082 posts) -

I think it is beyond awful.

#39 Posted by HellBrendy (994 posts) -

FC 2 has some real gamebreakers for me, but on the other hand it's really really great at other stuff. I grew to dislike it the more I played it, but now I kind of want to replay it to enjoy the better aspects of it.

The bad: Repetative side quests, checkpoints respawning way to quickly, some really annoying animals running infront of your car.

The good: The general mood of the game, the friend saving your ass-mechanic, the general feel of the weapons, the open world

#40 Posted by murisan (1119 posts) -

@ArtisanBreads said:

@mbr2 said:

If you want a unique video game experience then play FC2 if you want something that's like every other video game then play FC3. I don't get the common complaints about FC2. Respawing enemies? YOU'RE PLAYING AN FPS!!! Do you also complain about having to shoot stuff often when playing Doom? The other I see often is having to drive around to places. IT'S AN OPEN WORLD GAME!!!! What the fuck is the point of having an open world if you can skip across it like some motherfucking teleporting wizard? "Ugh! What is this? An open world where I have to traverse the world!?" People who hate FC2 clearly bought the wrong game.

lol sure, you're right. I'm just an idiot.

No, mbr2 is. FC3 is NOT like every other videogame, unless I've been missing LITERALLY EVERY OTHER VIDEOGAME AND I WOULD LOVE TO PLAY THOSE. An open world with great gunplay/mechanics, a meaningful skill progression system (not just YUR GUNZ SHOOTS BETTAR NOW *LOOKIN AT YOU BORDERLANDS*), some good humor, some GREAT acting, and a very long single player campaign.

I would love to hear these "other videogames" that are like Far Cry 3, because I want to play them all.

#41 Posted by Jrinswand (1700 posts) -

I've tried playing a couple of times, but the whole "I have a disease that keeps flaring up every 30 minutes and makes my vision all blurry" thing kept me from ever getting into it. I think it'd probably be a great game if it weren't for that one huge flaw.

Online
#42 Posted by Breadfan (6589 posts) -

I loved Far Cry 2. It takes a while to get going, but after that it is awesome.

#43 Posted by Nottle (1912 posts) -

I had someone tell that to me about God Hand... WHOSE LAUGHING NOW?

I think Far Cry 2 is tedious. Some parts are cool, but overall the world is uninteresting and tedious to explore, the enemies that respawn at every checkpoint aren't fun to fight, your guns are always breaking. Nothing really stands out for me about the experience other than that. Also it has a lame ending. Though there is one sort of cool part halfway though and towards the end. Really though. Wait for 3.

#44 Edited by BaconGames (3359 posts) -

I absolutely loved Far Cry 2 when I played through it. The world, the shooting, and the upgrading were all a blast. BUT, the enemy posts that are dotted around do respawn after you kill them. After fighting them for a while, I got tired of it and decided to just drive past them with bullets whizzing by me which was actually more fun than before. I wouldn't sweat that stuff and I wouldn't give too much stock about the story. I enjoyed the faction stuff and I thought there are some interesting implications to ponder but as far as character or plot is concerned, it's whatever.

I would say though that I probably couldn't do them in reverse order because Far Cry 3 basically looks like Far Cry 2 + 1 in that it builds on 2 instead of the first game. It has not stopped being absolutely divisive and there's no guarantee as to how you'll feel about it but at the very least give it a shot and see if you're in one camp or another.

#45 Posted by Irvandus (2875 posts) -

It's really cool. It's tedious but not that terrible.

#46 Posted by Krakn3Dfx (2486 posts) -

FC2 is great. I've played through all of the Far Cry games from start to finish, and 2 is probably my favorite of all. It requires a bit more work to get into the meat of the game, but once you're there, it's a blast.

#47 Posted by jakob187 (21662 posts) -

I love them all. I think Far Cry 2 just got a bad rep right out of the gate. I thoroughly loved the multiplayer on that game, particularly its excellent map editor.

Out of the three, though, it IS the lesser of the series. However, the first and third set an INCREDIBLY high bar, so even at that point, Far Cry 2 is still an excellent game.

It's also only, like, $5 on GOG right now for PC.

#48 Posted by phantomzxro (1571 posts) -

It a cool game that was just crippled by its over the top survival game play mechanics they sound cool on paper but slows the game down when really playing the game. It did many cool things that i say most open world shooters did not at the time. With these great things of fire spreading across the area and having side mission givers being more dynamic to game play was cool.

Along with those great ideas came always jamming guns, re-pawning enemies at check points, Random encounters that were too common (to the level of an old school rpg), having to fix injures in the middle of gun fights, having malaria(sp) that you needed pills to cure every hour or so, and so on. These things start to make the game a slog to play and start to be more trouble then there worth when you can have all those things happening at once in the middle of battle which is no fun at all.

If you can live with that stuff i say its worth a play to gain some context when you play far cry 3, so you know how things have changed game play wise.

#49 Posted by EuanDewar (4873 posts) -

Should miyamoto die?

#50 Posted by stryker1121 (1394 posts) -

If you can forgive its foibles, FC2 is a great shooter. The world felt alive and dangerous like no FPS I've ever played. An acquired taste, but well worth it if you're willing to invest a little time and patience.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.