Far Cry 2 IS Realistic

[bud389]

Why is everyone saying Far Cry 2 is unrealistic? I think i need to spell some things out for some of the people out there.

- Enemies die in one shot to the head from any gun
- Enemies die from fire nearly instantly (if they become engulfed)
- I have killed an enemy with an AK in 3 shots before so i don't know what everyone is complaining about, just stop using the Mavorok pistol is alls i can say
- Enemies don't "Get back up" after being killed, they may not be killed in the first place, only incapacitated on the ground and then try to recooperate
- There is a fairly large amount of wildlife, i don't know why everyone was expecting predatory animals since none were even shown
- Respawning troops, well, they only respawn when you've travelled a great distance away from it, so i guess in the game world you could assume a patrol took over it, but i could come to an agreement of making the respawn times longer, i would say 15 - 20 minutes for each
- Ragdoll mixed with animation works smoothly
- Guns jamming IS NOT a nuisance, it's just another obstacle of surviving
- AI is not stupid in anyway, it acts realisticly, instead of like incredibley sophisticated super computers (Although there is a glitch i have noticed where the AI is pointing their gun in a different direction, but when they fire they hit you)
- Depending on the situation AI will react differently and will also argue with eachother over tactics and when being attacked or when looking for you
- AI will also react to getting shot in certain areas and if hurt enough, (mabye only if hurt badly in the leg) they will limp
- Recoil is believable
- Vehicles braking down, although it may occur often, it occurs due to believable actions that would cause it to act such a way in real life
- Gun accuracy is believable

So i am completely puzzled when someone says that Far Cry 2 isn't "Realistic", mabye not the most realistic game ever or like Rainbow six, but it certainly is realistic.

[iDeekz]

I'd say they aimed at making it realistic, but haven't quite made it yet.

At the start of the Game you do actually get to see people driving around, walking and doing daily life things. When you actually play the game you see none at all apart from the people in buildings when getting medicine. I find it stupid how they missed this as everyone in this game is a enemy accept the people you work for and your buddies. Like at the start, the Cab Driver had to stop at a outpost and then ask to be let threw. Why can't this happen in game while with other people doing the same thing. I would love to see other people driving around, hunting and even fighting.

I'd say this is the main thing they missed.

[bud389]

Originally Posted by Icespeed

I'd say they aimed at making it realistic, but haven't quite made it yet.

At the start of the Game you do actually get to see people driving around, walking and doing daily life things. When you actually play the game you see none at all apart from the people in buildings when getting medicine. I find it stupid how they missed this as everyone in this game is a enemy accept the people you work for and your buddies. Like at the start, the Cab Driver had to stop at a outpost and then ask to be let threw. Why can't this happen in game while with other people doing the same thing. I would love to see other people driving around, hunting and even fighting.

I'd say this is the main thing they missed.

Wouldn't it just become a GTA clone except in africa and in first person then? I mean, sure, they definately could've added civilians in it, but the thing with being at peace with the gaurds? I see that as highly unlikely when you've got a rocket launcher on your back and an AK47 in your hands.

But yes, they definately COULD'VE added civilians but the problem with that is, how would they penalize you for killing them? And other then just putting them in the setting it wouldn't really effect anything, especially if there's no penalty for killing them.

[¬ _ ¬]

I say everything in that game is realistic EXCEPT the god damn damage...

Am I the only one that has a problem with it?

[sn00ke]

As far as games go, it's somewhat realistic. The problem is that most of the game stops being fun and just becomes a chore.

And the damage system is badly done. I could overlook the fact that it takes half a clip from a G3 to down someone because who knows, maybe that vest they're wearing is magically tough enough to stop 7.62 rounds. But when you have barechested guys taking the same damage, it's annoying.

The weapon jamming was also badly implemented. A Kalashnikov bought brand new from a dealer should not degrade and explode in 1 day. Instead of having weapons made of rotten cheese, they should have just included normal misfires as part of all the rifles, you chamber another round or switch mags and keep going. They also could have linked weapon degradation with the environment (ie. swimming and sustained full-auto firing = more misfires).

But overall I could get past those two things. What took away any hope of replay value for me were the checkpoints.

[LikeSo]

It's realistic in comparison with other games, certainly. It's probably one of if not the most realistic FPS out there, and yes, in my opinion, it beats Crysis for realism (not graphics, however).

I'm having the damage issue, where it takes 10 shots to kill an enemy, and that is really annoying. But my main issue with the game, is that I can drive past a checkpoint half a kilometre away from my objective, complete the objective, drive back, and the checkpoint is repopulated. I mean, how the hell did they get there so fast?!

Other than that though, it's a fantastic game, and while it won't win Game of the Year, it's certainly a contender.

[bud389]

I don't know why everyone is so angry about the gaurd post thing, im fine with it and would settle for timed respawns, but not rediculously long respawn times like 30 mintues.

About Crysis, the gunplay is much more realistic, i mean, the bullets are actual objects and travel at speeds (fire a sniper rifle at a korean half a mile away and you'll see what i mean) which is very realistic, and depending on the armor grade of the koreans defines how many hits they can take and you can also knock them, not kill them, into the air sometimes by shooting them at certain angles in certain areas.

And it's actually a G3A4, not that it really matters, but yea, they should've chosen a less powerful rifle to be the weakest and most generic one in the game.

[>Omen<]

It's not that it's so utterly unrealistic, it's that it's much more arcadish than many were expecting and shallow and nonsensical in missions. The gunplay could be more realistic, but that's not what bothers me. It's doing the same type of missions over and over, often times repeatedly in the same area, with convoys and shipments that continuously circle a given spot like tin targets in a shooting gallery.

The AI is quite good in some ways, but other ways ridiculous. It doesn't make any sense when you're driving along in a Jeep that has a 30 or 50 cal MG or even grenade launcher mounted on it that a maniac in a little Datsun would come boldly screeching up to you and jump out as if to say, "Kill me, I'm an idiot". Or the way they'll even repeatedly bash into the guard rail of a bridge if they see you sneaking along the river bank below until they break through it and drive straight into the river and drown.

The AI's main idiosyncrasy seems to be jumping in the nearest vehicle and driving straight at you, even if you're standing atop your Jeep on the MG having just mowed down half their camp. They do this automatically, yet many of them carry grenades and some even RPGs, but you don't see them use them too often. Ubi needs to take some notes from the way, AI works in games like FEAR, CoD, Crysis and even Far Cry 1.

Once you become familiar with the game it's not hard to get your kills and avoid the respawns if you want to. You can't however change how arcadish and shallow the game is, which ultimately means less replay value than other games that aren't. Ultimately all games are going to lack realism in some ways, as they are just games and they have to give you a challenge. What separates them is how interesting the challenges are, and FC 2 lacks that to a large degree due to the shoot anything that moves repetition and uninteresting missions.

The story wasn't fleshed out very good. It doesn't even really feel like there are separate factions. The guys you encounter after taking a mission might as well be virus crazed mutants in a sci fi movie. There's no recognition if and when you are doing a mission for the factions they work for, which makes the missions themselves feel even less significant. Of course Ubi excuses this lazy AI scheme with the faction leaders telling you your missions are covert ops and even their own troops will shoot if they see you.

[sn00ke]

It felt like a lazy game. Speaking of AI, I was really impressed when I cleaned out a checkpoint, saw a random jeep come and then as soon as it saw me, turn around and speed away. Why they would show intelligence like that but as Omen said, have morons in hatchbacks try to ram your grenade launching jeep.

I get much angrier about Far Cry 2 than an unfinished game like Stalker because they made a highly polished game only to have it ruined by a few details they missed.

[sn00ke]

Actually Omen, now that you mention it...FC2 could be modded into a really good zombie game.