Far Cry 2 and the curious case of mainstream innovation

johnny_ultimate

Its been 36 months or so since Far Cry 2 was released. I'm only getting around to it now. I apologise for the lateness of this thread.

Sometimes a game takes you by surprise. A game you've heard a lot about, but always just shrugged off. I remember my enthusiasm for Far Cry 2 was initially crushed when player and critical reaction was mixed at best. After reading a few articles about various gameplay mechanics, and a coincidentally timed PSN sale, I decided to give it an impulsive download. A mere three hours playing later, and I'm actually rather astounded.

Far Cry 2 is not perfect, that's for sure. What it is is ambitious, forward thinking and quietly revolutionary within the confines of a first person shooter. Here's what it does right:

Makes your tools unreliable: Gun-jamming makes fights more intense, unpredictable and dynamic. Cars prone to failure from a few gun shot makes you feel anything but invincible. These mechanics aren't perfect, but they're a hell of a lot more interesting than making your guns faster and stronger. Every game makes you feel like a superman. Its nice to have one that reminds you as often as it can that you're pretty worthless.

Makes you feel like an asshole: You're running around Africa stealing conflict diamonds, ffs! On one mission, I was sneaking up on some guards after massacring their colleagues. I heard them reflecting on how "he got the new guy. I think his name was Frank". **** buzz.

You've got a friend in me: The 'buddy' system, while overly-tightly scripted by the designers, still makes gunfights and missions feel more rewarding and interesting. If they were a little more unpredictable, there's an awful lot of potential here.

The map system: This is ingenious. Brilliantly awkward. Again, the crappy GPS and constant need to drive while trying to hold up your map merely reinforce the feeling of one man vs the world. It makes navigation a far more active, engaging process. And, dare I say, its a little more realistic than a magic GPS.

Makes the environment a vital gameplay element: Unpredictable forest fires ftw!

Far Cry 2 is this weird compromise between realism and fantasy. All the gameplay mechanics are founded in some sort of reality, but have gone through a strange transformation to make them 'playable'. The result is a one-of-a-kind and extremely ambitious game that somehow just works. Again, the flaws are numerous - the fact that there are so many new mechanics makes their limitations even more noticeable. Also the people talk really, really fast, which is just annoying. But when the FPS is a genre stuck in stasis somewhat, Far Cry 2 dares to be different, and the results are utterly unique.

Innovation is only to be admired, and FC2 has idealism to spare. Its just a shame that in the three years hence, the vast majority of FPS games have just been a parade of fancy rollercoasters that are in many ways a step back in the genre's decades long evolution. Perhaps Far Cry 3 will be the game to pick up the baton and push bravely forwards. Until then, if you'll excuse me, I have a savannah to explore.

dreamers75

The sickness system and respawning checkpoints ruined all of the above tho.

Skerries

that ruined it for me and gave up on it after about 8 hours of gameplay
was there a mod released to sort that out?

PogMoThoin

So monotonous, I gave up half way through

Retr0gamer

I did enjoy Far Cry 2 and I do want to go back and play it. Not sure about innovation. It felt like Stalker, except Stalker did it all a hell of a lot better. I do think it was a very admirable effort though and still after 3 years it and the stalker series are the only two games in that vein while the corridor shooter is still alive.

Sephiroth_dude

Thought it was a great game apart from the annoying A.I,probably one of the few people to play it through till the end :-P

Retr0gamer

Oh one last thing, the ap editor in Far Cry 2 is fantastic, just like the excellent map editor in Far Cry instincts for the original Xbox. It's a crying shame that the lame and limited Forge mode of Halo gets lots of plaudits while Farcry 2 and Instincts had much better map editors built in. More console games should come with editors.

Somnus

Completely agree with you Johnny. I got it last summer and really loved it. It was totally immersive, had so so much atmosphere. And there was just something great about it that I couldn't put my finger on, just some style.

I agree with pretty much everything you said, all though I did feel the fire effect was drastically over hyped. It never really affected me at all.
But definitely a great game and I hope 3 can live up to it!

johnny_ultimate

I am more than bemused at how fast the characters talk. Very unusual.

I found a hangglider and awesome dune buggy thing on my travels today. Definitely made up for all those silly checkpoints and super-sight guards!

cherryghost

Hilarious as it is ironic. I started playing FC2 again over the weekend. I really enjoyed most of the game and tbh I only went back to play with the intention of only using the map editor for some ideas I conjured up. My curiosity into how the game had aged got the better of me and tbh its held up exceptionally well.

3 years and the FPS genre hasn't even budged a bit. I really hope Far Cry 3 builds on the rights and wrongs, the highs and indeed the lows of FC2.

marco_polo

Unfortunately even if Far Cry 3 is good Ubisoft will probably have their rubbish DRM all over it on the PC , and in that case I won't be touching it with a bargepole.

Kiith

The checkpoints and super guards that could pinpoint your location from 2 miles away pissed me when i briefly played it. It definitely had some great features, and fire was done really well, but i just couldn't get into it.

Myrddin

I thought it was rubbish compared to the first, which was pretty average apart from the incredible graphics. FC2 just didn't feel like a Far Cry game

PogMoThoin

EnterNow wrote: »

I thought it was rubbish compared to the first, which was pretty average apart from the incredible graphics. FC2 just didn't feel like a Far Cry game

Yeah, but it shouldn't really be compared to the first, it shared it's name only, different developer, different engine. A blatant attempt to falsely market a game on the good name of another. First was made by Crytek and was the Crysis of it's day with stunning pc melting graphics (although a meh game). Second was a lovely engine but a boring game.

Lets hope they get the third right, learn from their mistakes and don't make it so monotonous. They had a plan to have random weather and roaming predatory animals in the second, lets hope they get included in the third, could be interesting. They have a lovely engine to work with, it still looks amazing.

Myrddin

PogMoThoin wrote: »

Yeah, but it shouldn't really be compared to the first, it shared it's name only, different developer, different engine. A blatant attempt to falsely market a game on the good name of another. First was made by Crytek and was the Crysis of it's day with stunning pc melting graphics (although a meh game). Second was a lovely engine but a boring game.

Lets hope they get the third right, learn from their mistakes and don't make it so monotonous. They had a plan to have random weather and roaming predatory animals in the second, lets hope they get included in the third, could be interesting. They have a lovely engine to work with, it still looks amazing.

Ah I wasn't aware of that, makes perfect sense

Chairman Meow

It was a decent game but to be honest its nothing revolutionary, all it is is a console version of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. It copies its gameplay almost entirely from stalker, if you changed it from Africa to Ukraine, it couldve been Stalker 2.

Edit

Tho it isnt fit to polish stalkers boots.

Mr Freeze

I loved Far Cry 2.....

Ya the checkpoints and guards with ridiculously incredible vision were really annoying, but I still loved it. They did make you stay off the main roads which was kinda cool.

I never got tired of the long range sniping, creating bush fires, planting mines and blowing up those weapon convoys and patrols.

Tonnes of great bits like sniping most guys in a base from way off, firing on the 1st guy not to kill him, only to wound him, then killing all the others that came to help, then firing at tanks that would explode and create fires and kill the remaining guys running around in all the confusion. Then stroll into camp with my Desert Eagle and blow all the survivors away. I felt like the bad guy as they were constantly saying crap like "don't you die on me" while helping their wounded pals.

Anyways, I think there was too much freedom in the game for some people, some people prefer to run down linear corridors in their shooters. And it was probably a bit too long too, and it got repetitive, some people like their 4 hour single player campaigns.:pac:

johnny_ultimate

I really like STALKER too, but to me they feel like very different games. Sure we're better off with both!

penev10

FC2 had some great ideas but they weren't very well implemented.

The whole 2 factions thing was overly simplistic and didn't feel like it had any impact on the world as a whole. The re-spawning of enemies in the checkpoints was totally game-breaking imo, completely ruined the immersion. The missions were repetitive and ultimately didn't encourage me to continue the game and I gave up less than halfway through.

Duggy747

FC2 was a good idea but, good grief, it was repetitive and was let down by some extremely poor mechanics and AI.

Some elements in the game felt fresh while others like respawning checkpoints and enemies spotting you from miles away felt like a major step backwards in gaming. Looked great but it's core was fatally flawed for me.

Also, no matter where you were on the map a mission always required you to drive to the opposite side, through repetitive checkpoints, bang bang shoot shoot, and drive back through repetitive checkpoints.

tok9

Duggy747 wrote: »

FC2 was a good idea but, good grief, it was repetitive and was let down by some extremely poor mechanics and AI.

This.

There was absolutely no variety in the gameplay. Quite enjoyed the look and feel of the game though and spent ages just burning the place!

Potential-Monke

I remember when i first got it i was amazed by the graphics, the foliage and forest fires were beautiful, and the guns felt and sounded real. The jamming was a brilliant enhancer. But, like many others, the respawning checkpoints pixed me off greatly. In the end i was just driving through them and hoping they wouldn't follow me in their jeeps.

Also, i spent ages collecting the diamonds and then i done what i thought was the start of the last mission, only to drive into another area the same size as the first and have to do the same stuff all over again. That's when i stopped playing.