When I first played Far Cry 2 in 2012 I was so drawn in that I played for thirteen hours straight and forgot to eat. I launched it for the very first time just before noon one day and finished just after midnight.

It would take me until late 2018 to find a game that was capable of doing something similar but this game still holds a special place in my heart. While later entries have an undeniable edge when it comes to polish and having a more fleshed-out open world, I don't think someone would find it as special if their intro to the series was one of those games. FC2 is more unforgiving than subsequent entries and takes its story more seriously.

In a way, Far Cry 2 feels somewhat like the first film of a famous filmmaker that you only ever watch out of curiosity. If it weren't for Moonrise Kingdom, I wouldn't have any interest in watching Bottle Rocket and so on. Outside of attempts to ape the success of the original Far Cry on the original Xbox and then later to the 360 and Wii, Far Cry 2 is the first proper game that Ubisoft made with the brand name, and it shows. It's almost shocking that the game that came after this was Far Cry 3. Case in point, there isn't a mini-map here. Your character has to be physically holding the map in their hands for you to read it, and if you're playing on PC, the key you press to access the map is next to all of the ones you use to pull out guns. The general impression here isn't that Ubisoft was attempting to push ambition through a giant world map. Through your experience within much smaller and more detailed spaces, you're given the idea that technology was at the forefront of the experience. While the phrase "tech demo" might cross your mind, it belies the rest of the experience. Looking beyond what must have wowed people in 2008, there's a solid game in here with lots of tension that often gets overlooked in terms of discussions surrounding enemy camps, character upgrades, and all of the water-cooler talk that later games in this series embraced. There's still a lot of fun to be had here, even if it isn't driving a car with C4 on its side into a fortress you're trying to conquer. That might make this game seem less interesting, and it almost is. But it's this absence of bombast that sets it apart as the most unique game in the series. Had Far Cry followed in the footsteps of this instead of throwing a lot of its bullet points out for more emergent systems, I'm certain we would talk about the series differently nowadays.

What ultimately holds this experience back, even with those expectations, is that its narrative is about as dry as its color palette. Aside from its imposing world, there isn't much to pull you in. The introduction does you no favors, either, and made me realize how much I've taken Skyrim's opening cart ride for granted over the years. You can see the bones of what would end up being Vaas in Far Cry 3 through the opening scene with The Jackal, but the set-up for meeting him and the actual voice performance feel cookie-cutter at best. And then you step out into the world, and it's... eh. Oh, sure, there's artistic intent. It makes the world feel less welcoming and more hostile to the player. But so did Shadow of Chernobyl, and that game had some fucking color in it. I'm unashamed to admit that I installed an ENB as soon as I decided to start replaying this again because I just really don't find grey and brown to be that pleasing to the eyes. Combined with an upscaled texture pack, it looks slightly better; although all ENBs tend to have the issue that character model mods in Bethesda games have where their improvements can start to feel artificial past a certain threshold. Still, it works for what it is and has helped me to appreciate Far Cry 2 for what it is a little more. Whether or not that's the recommended experience depends on how much you mind the threshold I mentioned. If you believe post-processing takes away from the experience, by all means, skip it. I do recommend the texture pack, though. It's not a massive, 4K, "night and day" improvement, but it's only about two gigs in total and gives the world a little more clarity.

My impressions so far are this: this is the kind of game that would benefit from a remake the most. Not because my mini-map-obsessed gamer-brain needs constant UI pop-ups to be satisfied, but because the envelope could absolutely be pushed further with newer technology. And also because it would mean the narrative could be given another chance to be interesting, I dunno. Sadly, a proper remake would mean the project would have to be handed to a studio that doesn't tell its employees that "women don't sell" and fixate over seedy trenchcoat monetization practices that wouldn't be out of place behind the barren dentist's office you frequented as a youngling. If it ever does happen, Bloober Team better not be behind it.

I'll say that, in terms of first attempts, Far Cry 2 is more reminiscent of Reservoir Dogs than Bottle Rocket. It still holds up without knowing that its developers would go on to develop bigger, more interesting projects. All of the trademarks that you would later see in those projects are here in small and subtle ways, so you're not missing much, and a lot of what isn't carried over is genuinely fascinating to mull over. Is it the black sheep of its series? Do I care? It's unique, and I don't love it, but I also kind of do. It deserves slightly more recognition than it's gotten over the years, but anyone who tells me that they've bounced off of it for all of the things that could be addressed with hindsight has understandable reasons to do so.

Deveria ficar apenas para o vídeo, mas é muito difícil não falar desse jogo. Para um comentário breve;

Mesmo que após bioshock, vários FPS comecem a questionar as ações tomadas pelos jogadores, poucos conseguiram integrar tão bem essa mensagem (anti-violência) na gameplay quanto Far Cry 2.

Diferente de outros, como o spec ops: the line, mesmo as mecânicas (interações com o jogo) e a gameplay (aplicação dessas interações no mundo simulado) tornam esse tipo de jogo, que deveria ser absolutamente prazeroso, muito difícil de ser jogado.

Você anda de carro por aí até se deparar com um posto de inimigos, é bastante difícil desviar do local, mas qual a recompensa de enfrentar essas pessoas? Nenhuma.

A nossa arma desgasta, corre o risco de emperrar ou de "explodir" na nossa mão, você perde cura e não ganha nem dinheiro nem XP para progredir o personagem, em locais que depois de alguns minutos, serão novamente abastecidos por inimigos.

Matar em Spec Ops é divertido, mas o jogo te questiona moralmente sobre essa diversão através dos diálogos e cenas.

Matar em Far Cry 2 é um inconveniente. E cada vez que sua arma emperrar, você vai se lembrar disso.

Absolutely amazing from the artistic side, a fps that actually shows you how terrible war is witouth yelling what a piece of shit you are when they make you kill innocents. You're a mercenary, a death dealer, trying to make a buck killing other people, you get screwed by nature and the ever changing politics in a civil war, and now you must survive and try to get as much money out of the conflict as you can.
With mechanics like respawning enemies in territories you try and try to clear, in practice it lacks a more interesting story, but the feeling of desolation and hurt haven't been realized in any other game as of yet.
The gun play is pretty uninteresting, the rust in the weapons is a fun gimmick but gets boring pretty fast,.
A bitch to play in modern computers, but really worth it if you get it on cheap.
If it ever gets a remaster it will probably suck

this really is a playable action movie
the combat is very simplistic but to be honest thats what i enjoy about it
even though it doesnt come across as a hard game fighting the enemies feels like a struggle for survival
its you versus a whole fucking army
and everything has such a fucked up vibe
for example your weapons can litreally blow up
this game creates a disgusting but beatiful looking world that doesnt care about you
the enemies are way too aggressive at points and immediately know where you are
and sure that is really annoying but it adds up to its destroying nature
the whole malaria thing is just a gimmick and nothing else but it makes you feel like a soldier that has nothing to live for
it shows your mortality in this gruesome world
its an invisible enemy that is always around you
there is a lot i appreciate about this game and is without a doubt the best of its series
but there are also a lot of things i didnt like
why cant you just skip all the bullshit talking
yes its important for the immersion but i dont care about it especially when the npc's constantly shaking there head because of some stupid glitch
the driving is way too repetitive but i like that you really have to plan which route you wanna take
stealthing is basically impossible since the enemies recognize you instantly and is nothing more than left out potential
but the overall experience was pretty great
i recommend you just killing every enemy you see because they really wanna see you dead
most enemies just chase you with a car in order too run you over so just be careful and you wont be as frustrated as most people who hate this game

...if anything, it's not punishing enough? currently struggling to make it much further in this game - wonderful environment and aesthetics, the gold standard for map usage in video games, tightly balanced player-defiant mechanics and intriguing metanarrative elements intertwine into anathema for the modern open world experience, and yet for every stroke of genius and for every emergent design decision there is there exists something equally repellent. learning that malaria is an obfuscated level up mechanic was the breaking point for me and the artifice only piled up from there. a genuine shame - during that brief illusory period where i felt every inconvenience to be true and every threat to be hazardous, the game shone like a diamond

Many action stories produced by the modern entertainment industry (especially in the United States) follow a specific narrative “mold” where the main character, an individual from the western “civilized” world, is sent to a poor, “uncivilized” country torn by war. The protagonist's goal is to complete a heroic mission, usually consisting of somehow saving the innocent portion of the population from the savage evildoers (who are depicted as solely responsible for the conflict), acting in the interests of both countries and reaching a satisfying, morally unambiguous conclusion. This, of course, serves as wish fulfillment for the country that holds narrative power over the production, as it provides a comfortable fantasy that would justify their actions in the real world. It may not be directly government-funded propaganda, but it reflects how the citizens from these western countries (again, almost exclusively the United States) see themselves: as necessary saviors of foreign nations. The main character's brutal killings are then framed as heroic acts, essential for the population's liberation. "Sugarcoated" is an understatement. This framing completely sanitizes any involvement from the powerful attacker, painting all of it as heroic altruism, a mission to "introduce democracy to the primitive people". In these narratives, the third world and its instability are objectified, turned into a tool to deliver both entertainment and political reaffirmation.

Far Cry 2 completely rejects this notion and offers, in its place, amoral realism. You start the game with the objective to kill an arms dealer, "the bastard who sells guns to both sides", as the game describes him. However, any pretense of morality is completely discarded less than an hour into the playthrough. After a brief introduction, you begin your journey by doing mercenary work, oftentimes war crimes, for both factions behind the conflict. You are not a hero, there are no good intentions here, you're a foreigner murdering Africans for money. As everyone else involved in this war, you maim and kill for selfish gains. Far cry 2 opts for a realistic depiction of the conflicts that are so sanitized by the entertainment industry at large. It doesn't shy away from recognizing the western presence in these countries, too. Half of your bosses are white and have European or North American origins. All of them show the same degree of disdain towards human life. You'll hear their attempts at morally justifying their actions through a simplified rhetoric: "They brought this on themselves", "Some destruction is necessary for the greater good", etc. It’s a reflection of the modern “imperialist” logic. But there is no justification for cutting off water supplies, killing professors and destroying medicine storages.

The game doesn't explicitly judge your actions, but it presents them without a filter. There isn't a moral bias to exempt your atrocities. It’s clear that you're just a killer, another pawn aiding the continuity of this conflict. What’s unique about Far Cry 2's narrative is that there isn't an active author's voice condemning or congratulating you, things are presented as they are, and you're the one to comprehend the immorality of your actions. However, it isn’t a game without a statement. Several literal elements help paint a clear message. There is a deliberate aura of dread permeating every moment in this experience, effectively enforced through visuals and game design choices, that helps set the tone of utter helplessness in a collapsing society.

The aesthetics of decay and misery are intensely palpable, Far Cry 2’s Africa looks unbearable to inhabit. Outposts are made of metal debris, safehouses are claustrophobic wooden huts, people are dirty and injured. All of this is presented through a dry, overwhelmingly saturated color palette that makes the game uncomfortable to look at (the graphics are quite nice, though).

This visually and narratively decaying world serves as the perfect backdrop to a gameplay loop built to oppress you. Enemies are aggressive, accurate and deal high damage. Guns jam frequently and healing plays a slow animation that locks you in place and cancels itself whenever you’re hit. Outside of the rare safehouses and towns, your safety is never guaranteed, as an enemy vehicle could always be rapidly rushing your position. In my personal experience, I thought the game was a little too forgiving when set to Hardcore difficulty, but too limiting when set to Infamous. While the former allows you to engage in interesting strategies in the middle of a dynamic combat, the latter forces you to find a rock, tree or car, crouch behind it and never leave cover until everyone is dead. That’s boring. I believe Infamous is designed to provide a dynamic and challenging experience to those who are already experienced with the game, which is not my case. A perfect difficulty (for me, at least) would have the higher damage taken and lower ammo count from Infamous with more fragile, less accurate enemies. In this sense, Far Cry 2 doesn’t fully succeed in its oppressive gameplay design. It’s either too easy or too boring. It’d be unfair to call the game unfun, however. Regardless of difficulty, the gameplay is fluid, allowing you multiple approaches to each scenario and providing you with opportunities to plan your actions ahead of time. I found myself making quick, unusual decisions in the middle of combat to maximize safety and resources, such as choosing not to blow up an enemy vehicle so I could steal it later or doing a sudden sideways drift near an enemy outpost in order to use my own car as cover. Your strategies and goals can change in the middle of every encounter, making combat dynamic and entertaining to engage with.

Traversing the environment is often a hassle. No fast travel means you’ll have a map shoved in your face almost every time you’re not shooting people, as if you were playing a very sick, twisted version of Firewatch. The difficulty in traveling is essential for a pure experience, but this aspect could have been implemented with more grace. Two or three additional bus stops scattered around the map would have still made traveling long distances essential (making you vulnerable for long periods of time) while alleviating some of the duller aspects of checking a map every 3 seconds to make sure you’re on the right track. I’m exceptionally awful at spatial localization, though, so that might be a more personal problem.

Your journey is, for the most part, aimless. The story feels static, there is no sense of progression and nothing you do makes any significant difference. Even the ending sequence makes it clear that your efforts came to nothing. It reflects the main character, an emotionless mercenary disconnected from reality who is concerned only with profit and satisfaction. The protagonist serves as a representation of the unthinking player, the type of individual to engage with a game like this from a purely indulgent perspective, fully embracing the role of psychopath murderer assigned to them and never stopping to consider the context surrounding their actions. The main character doesn’t become a villain, he has always operated following the same cynical approach towards existence: It is worth to trade countless human lives in exchange for profit. “I used to be you”, says the Jackal. There are no heroes in Far Cry 2. There are no villains either. Only war remains when you annihilate humanity.

A lot of this game bridged together Francis Ford Coppola's Apocalypse Now and his daughter, Sofia's Somewhere in my mind.

So much of this game on the surface is Apocalypse Now, the third act blatantly so (trophies are direct references to the movie and Heart of Darkness). It's a violent war game, after all. And yet Apocalypse Now is still more meditative than the average war movie. It's more Thin Red Line than Rambo 2, which is a shame when this game's big third act level is more Rambo and Predator than Apocalypse Now. You gun down a lot of combatants, sure. But none quite so systematically and forcefully as you do at the end. And I think it's a shame because so much of the game between missions is Somewhere - a more quiet, introspection piece on boredom and ennui.

In between taking missions for either side of an armed conflict in a foreign land that resents you and that you too, couldn't care less about personally, you're mostly just roaming a sparse, open environment, trying to starve off malaria and other mercenaries who shoot and practically hunt you on sight. There's nothing to do at any one time other other one of two basic functions: kill or try to stay alive and live. And it's that aimless meandering and sparseness that remind me so much of Somewhere. A movie celebrity and game. Far Cry 2 - a game about mercenaries and death. But both about depression too.

This game reminds me of my day to day life, where I am bored out of my mind, working for the weekend, just getting by, placed in circumstances that I feel I had less control over than I would have liked, doing my best but also doing nothing ultimately constructive or rewarding.

I love how much in general this game hates you as a character but not necessarily as a player. The world resents your presence. Your character has to pop malaria pills that they can run out of, and the guns jam. But it all works wonderfully into the nihilism and theme of decay that permeates through the game. And none of it is too much. It's still mostly a gun-toting romp. It just doesn't feed your power fantasy. It's a very intentionally deigned game, but I think it ultimately is also has an unintended effect of weeding out particular types of gamers. I'm struggling to articulate what I mean by this so I'll be blunt: either you're cool and you like this game or you're not cool and you don't. :p Eleven years later Death Stranding would sort of be the same game all over again.

This slapped, fucked and ripped.