If you enjoy the reviewing process or just want to share your thoughts on a game, I say go for it. I started using a list on GB to record my impressions of games as i finished them because I like to think about the experience after it's over and summarize my thoughts. I've never gotten into formal reviews, though, partly because of the time it takes and partly because I prefer not to think critically about a game the whole time I'm playing it. I also don't enjoy assigning scores to games because I feel it oversimplifies the experience, but I understand why people find them useful and I look at reviewer's scores quite a bit.
noahrc's forum posts
40. There are hang gliders lying around Africa for anyone to use.
41. If an animal runs into a parked vehicle in Africa, it will fall over dead.
42. Cassette tapes sold in Africa only hold about a minute-long recording.
43. People in Africa carry their uncut diamonds in briefcases that give off a traceable signal.
I agree that the mission structure in FC2 was too repetitive and enemies respawned too quickly. However, I would argue that FC2 single player was a great experience for me because of it's frustrating moments. The game constantly forced you to make difficult decisions and rethink your strategies based on your current equipment, surroundings and whatever unexpected problems came up. Some typical decisions you might face on any given mission, include:
Do you try to drive through an outpost, around it, or clear it out from a distance?
Do you fix your steaming engine, try to keep driving to safety, switch to the mounted gun or ditch the vehicle and run?
Do you clear a weapon jam or switch to a different one?
Do you heal your buddy or risk his death and clear the area?
Do you take malaria pills or wait for the effects to wear off, and risk eventually collapsing?
Do you keep a good weapon with no ammo or pick up one that might jam?
Obviously, not everyone enjoys facing these kinds of decisions, but for me they made the world feel much more realistic and dangerous.