Far cry 2 was definitely more immersive. It also had a bunch of flaws, like having to fix your car every 5 minutes and the so often mentioned respawning enemies. Those flaws are fixed in far cry 3 but the immersion has been replaced with user friendly gimmicks like fast travel. Do I hate the fast travel, no I love it. It's much better than going to the busstop in far cry 2 to take you to (if i remember correctly) 4 different places. From there you'd have to travel by yourself.
Far cry 3 is a gamer friendly, action packed game but lacks the gritty realistic atmosphere of its predecessor. i enjoyed far cry 3 but will remember far cry 2 more.
Will people please shut the fuck up about the pausing thing? Okay, so it added a tiny bit more "immersion" to far cry 2, but seriously, it's such an insignificant detail when you really think about it. There is so much other stuff in this game that makes it fantastic and superior to its predecessor, at least IMO. I'm fine with the other complaints people have about this game (that's just personal taste), but seriously stop blowing the whole "omg, the menu takes you out of the gameworld" crap already. Its about as dumb as saying that the game shouldn't have achievements, cuz achievements don't exist in the real-world. Also, jammed guns were just stupid too.
Amen to that. There's a fine line between realism being an awesome, welcome challenge, and it just being downright annoying. The whole Malaria crap was just unnecessary; it was just a pointless chore and another thing to worry about, which added nothing interesting to the game short of making your screen look all sickly and green every once in a while. Also, guns you picked up constantly getting jammed was dumb too. Sure, guns jam in real life, but not IMMEDIATELY after you shoot just one clip with them. If you want good weapon degradation, then go down the Fallout 3 route where they slowly degrade over a long period of time, but are still at least relatively functional even with low quality. And I also agree that having a map for realism, but then making it act just like a minimap, which is highly unrealistic, is also just dumb. The realism that does work was the healing process, which I wish they had in full-extent in FC3 as they did in FC2, because it added a nice degree of tension to firefights and those animations simultaneously made you cringe and feel like a total badass. Just loved pulling those bullets out of my flesh lol.
Could you manage to write 10 words without throwing a tantrum and trying to take a shot at a franchise or studio that was more successful than your little game? This reads like it was written by an angry little child, you spend more time talking about other games than you do about Far Cry 3. Amateur, completely amateur.
Far cry 2 was a goddamn joke compared to Far cry 1. Seriously I had never been that disappointed by a game. There was close to no story and the ki was a joke even on the highest difficulty. Far cry 3 makes a lot of things better. You have a lot of work to do, even if you finished the story and bought/unlocked every gun. Furthermore are hunting and stealth 2 importent new features. In far cry 3 you had to do the same things over and over and over again and you expected it to be different this time. But it wasn't. Now I know what Vaas tried to tell us...
Tom is such a trolling douche. Don't take his reviews seriously. Far Cry 3 is wicked good. I can hardly put down the controller. Once again the reviewer is just fishing for views to his paltry site. Journalistic morality doesn't exist here. Get real Tom. Stop this bullshit attention tactic.
This is really disappointing. I just thought up of a clever Facebook status... "Far Cry 3 is a far cry from Far Cry 2." I said to myself, gee, I'm sure the kind folks over at Quarter to Three would appreciate my wit.
Only to find out you literally called your Far Cry 3 review the exact same thing.
I think there are few things that annoy me more than an old games elitist. Listen I've been gaming pretty heavily since the original Nintendo was this amazing new device, the "old games were superior" thing is either elitist nerd posturing or a rose-colored view of the past. Were there great old games? Certainly, just like there are great games now, but just like now, the majority of games back then were nothing special or even downright crap.
That's not a reason not to try FC3. Most of the points raised in this article are somewhat valid, but FC2 was terrible as a videogame, and this one here is a very solid AssCreed/Just Cause game. Except the premise is insulting, yes. I'd of course much rather play a mercenary in a war-torn African nation than an Average Joe who morphs into a machine gun wizard a few minutes into the story.
Going the Bethesda route is never sane. It makes no sense that a AK47 suddenly does less damage (linearly too) the more you use it.
Of course in a videogame you won't play for multiple years, thus gun quality degradation needs to be more frequent, or rather jamming has to occur more often than IRL. But your weapon having a reduced damage number just prompts people to go all OCD in fixing it. A lot like compulsive reloading.
This is an excellent point and my first thought as well. If you want to cry foul over Far Cry 3 not being a true sequel to 2 you have to realize it's not called Far Cry TWO for no reason! Three is arguably much more in line with the first, though Ubisoft has said many many times for a few years now that their plans for the Far Cry series are to make each game thematically similar, perhaps, but very much standalone experiences.
This review clearly states some of the things that developers do wrong in the name of immersion. I'm all for it in video games, it helps draw you in but someone on the team to be there to pull them back out when they're getting to far. Far Cry 2 was an outstanding game but it has some glaring flaws, in the name of immersion, that totally destroyed the enjoyment of the game itself.
The minimal fast travel, looking at your map, and Malaria are the big ones that come to mind. No fast travel meant way more tedious driving which is more like reality but not much fun. Having to look down at your map every ten seconds to make sure you're on the correct windy road to your destiny was realistic but way annoying at the same time.
I think people who demand these ultra realistic games need to get another hobby because when you think about it, someone could create the most realistic, most immersive game ever...it would still be a video game, there's no escaping that fact and when you realize that. Immersion should come second next to enjoyment every time. FC 2 could have been one of the best shooters ever if it wasn't for all those things that immersed the player more but drove them further from the overall enjoyment of the game itself, that just doesn't make sense to me.
I didn't play the first or second Far Cry but this review is pretty spot on to how I felt after playing and finishing 3. I was very disappointed overall. I really wanted to like it. I tried very hard to convince myself I liked it. And I do like it to a degree, it's good for some decent gunplay and a nice open world, but there are so many random inconsistencies with it that it just made me wonder why I'm playing anymore after a while. I finally decided to finish it the other day and boy did the ending suck and the alternate ending makes really... zero sense, just sort of tagged in at the end. The story was intense at some parts and was great in those moments, but much of the story made no sense to me and asked you to basically believe an unbelievable and pretty much impossible storyline, all the while, presenting it in an at least somewhat realistic light. I expected the story to be pretty realistic going in based on how it played and the way the story progressed, at first. It was meant to be immersive and impossible stories set in possible, realistic worlds, like this one, don't really scream "immersive." I got it for fairly cheap so it's OK, I will play it from time to time when I want to just run around and kill some pirates, but I am debating what to do about the camps. I want to liberate the camps because that's actually one of the best parts of the game in my opinion but once I liberate them, the bad guys leave... so what do I do after I finish them all? Restart? Fuck that. That's one of my biggest issues with it actually. I enjoy just running around doing random shit GTA style than actually playing the story which was supposed to be amazing. Anyway, I mostly agree with this review... I'm done ranting.
hearing you bitch makes me think you've forgotten that farcry2 isnt a sequel for farcry either... pretty sure the change of number means "new story" in the farcry series, since farcry, farcry instincts, and farcry predator were all numberless... they didnt make a sequel for farcry2 because it was boring and bullshit, why would you want to take care of a malaria patient when you could be kicking ass?
You only have to keep in mind that the enemies in FC2 have Batman's "detective mode" activated 100% of the time, so they can always spot you. Plus your character is wearing a neon suit that flashes and makes a loud noise, and holding a neon sign written "kill me".
Thus, no matter how stealthy you are, the enemies will always find you.
