Far Cry 2
 

Someone playing this game? and how do you like it? Is it beter than Hell's Highway, and can you're PC handel it?

Sort of taking back seat with me with Fallout 3 about to be released.

I'll get around to it, but I think a 4870 1 GB is in my near future to be able to handle it.

-S

I'll probably be getting it...somewhen...

I do hope it's going to be better (a LOT better) than Crysis

I got it tother day and love it! It's what Crysis should have been. It's runnin great on my rig, which is pretty low-end: 1.86ish GHz proc, 1.5GB RAM, nVidia 7600GS. I've got textures and shaders on Ultra high, Phys, Fire and RealTrees on Very high, and evrything else on med, I'm getting perfectly playable FPS (not measured it though). I'm not sure if I've enjoyed it more than Hell's Highway, maybe a bit but then I prefer PC games to console anyway, much more control.

I am running it pretty much maxed out with a 2,4ghz dual core, 4GB ram and a HD 4870 512MB. It look great, runs smoothly and - most importantly - its alot of fun! Much better than Crysis in every way, I reckon.

Guns jam (and misfire), you cant carry 1000 bullets, dynamic weather and day/night cycle, huge area to shoot to bits and burn, and stunning visuals. Its like Grand Theft Auto in first person ... in Africa.:rotfl:I just got it today, and I cant stop playing. It reminds me of how much I played the first one.

I heard that it shipped with SecuROM and the limited installation thing (like Spore and the upcoming Red Alert 3) though the Ubi version had 5 installs and you got one back every time you uninstalled.

Can someone who actually has a copy elaborate as to what actually shipped with the software? It looks like a lot of fun, but I don't want SecuROM on my system and I may have to pass if it's there. Too bad cause I'd have bought this game and RA3 as soon as it came out, but now I'll have to wait until maybe a gold version or budget version down the road.

Thanks,
LB

It has SecuROM.

Thanks for the confirmation.

It's quite frankly a great game; with some equally great issues that aren't bothering me much now, but could in the future.

Issues are:

• some consolitis (no fire mode switch, no leaning or prone)
• quite frequent respawning, meaning it can be a hassle to go from location to location (but also can be an adventure; I was bushwacked last night, and while running for my life found a case of diamonds in a burnt-out van)

Actually I guess that's about it for me. Otherwise, I'm finding it quite immersive, with some absoluterly fantastic animation features (pulling bullets out of yourself when healing, resetting your own broken arm, ammo crates that 'brew up' and spit bullets all over the place, jamming weapons, misfiring RPGs).

There's been a lot of bellyaching about graphics, which I'm at a loss to understand. I think the problem is it's being compared to Crysis, however I'd say it scales far better than Crysis does. For example, while Ultra High in Crysis will kill FC 2 in looks, Medium or high in FC 2 looks significantly better to me, probably because you can apply some AA (real AA, not Edge AA) without killing performance. FC 2 also runs a helluvalot better. In short: Guys, don't trust the negative feedback about graphics, they are truly stunning.

If people say this game is anything but beautiful they are crazy.

Not much to add to what Stabiz said. Mix of GTA and at times it reminds me of Oblivion/Fallouts/STALKER in some strange way I cant really put my finger to. :hmm: One of the things I like the best is the quality vs. performance, my GF8800GTS cant handle it maxed out but I use medium/high settings and it looks stunning still.

Sadly, from reading the forums, there isnt any plans to add singleplayer map editor nor it wont be most likely moddable. :nope:

And here's for whoever likes to see (well all you have to see them anyways, na na naa! :P), comparison shots from low to ultra high graphics. These are taken using DirectX 9. Could someone tell me the difference between very high & ultra high? I only noticed a drop of 20fps. :D

Low
http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...Ferret/Low.jpg

Medium
http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...ret/Medium.jpg

High
http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...erret/High.jpg

Very High
http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...rret/VeryH.jpg

Ultra High
http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/e...rret/Ultra.jpg

Yep, not much difference there, but you do see it more close up to vegetation and stuff. One thing I noticed is that shadow quality doesnt seem to have that much impact on fps in this game. I have them at high and the shadows are crisp and clear. Bloom, however, eats fps.

Might it be DX10 features that kick in on the ultra high?

Dont think so, I am able to choose ultra high in XP.

There is another thing that would be cool: The ability to holster/put away weapons.

*Off to hunt the Jackal*

Isn't it bizarre how two people, with probably quite similar machine specs, will have two completely different experiences? For me, with an AMD 3800+ dual-core and GeForce 8800GTX, it's high shadows that eat fps. Bloom has no impact whatsoever. I've noticed this in several games.

Going back to my point about annoyances in the game - that guard post respawning thing is really starting to get on my nerves. Given that this annoyance is almost universal amongst players, I'm pretty sure it'll be toned down in a patch.

Has anyone been to the Ubi forums for this game? I spent an hour there Friday night, an hour I wish I could have back, reading the most inane garbage posted there by 12 year old idiots who felt FC2 was the greatest swindle perpetrated on humanity since the lunar landing.