Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Far Cry 2:The Next Step in Ultra-Realistic Gaming

Far Cry 2 had me enthralled for quite a while, and I love that the conversation about this game is continuing across the community so long after its release.  I wrote about my exploits in the jungles of Africa, and about how the incredible engine and open-world environment were like nothing I've ever seen.  And that's really the clincher for me, plain and simple.  Far Cry 2's storyline is mediocre at best, and I agree with everyone that didn't give a lick about the characters, moral choices, or general narrative -- but I still think this is one of the best FPS games I've ever played.  

I called COD4 the perfect FPS last year, so what's really interesting is that the game was built fundamentally different than Far Cry -- it's based on scripted action and cinematic storytelling.  Far Cry 2 has almost none of this, and what parts of it are scripted (the intro sequence, and the areas where you accept missions) seem clunky and poorly done, completely disconnected from the rest of the game.  

Which is better?

If I had to pick either one of those titles right now, I'd pick COD4 as a clear winner for a landmark gaming experience that was culturally relevant and emotionally gripping.  Infinity Ward knows how to create that type of game, over and over again, and is going to continue raking in the dough doing it.  But, moving forward, I want more games like Far Cry 2!  Far Cry 2 has the start of an engine that is strong enough to take the gameplay experience that comes from scripted action and replace it completely with open-world, native functionality.  COD4 is the way of the past - Far Cry 2 is the future.

The Ubisoft guys are onto something. I think they've got the makings of what will be the foundations of the ultra-realistic, virtual reality games of the future, right here in Far Cry 2.  The elements are all there: complete freedom of movement around the world, photo-realistic graphics, interactive flora and fauna, destructibility (including realistic fire), integration of time and weather, and the polished feeling of a "body" that you inhabit (your character "heals" by bandaging himself, he extends his arm and you see the full motion of opening doors, he bends down and his arm picks up weapons, he becomes feint if you push him to sprint too long in one stretch, you watch as NPC's pat you down to check for hidden weapons).  I've never seen all of this done so well in one game before.  For all of Far Cry's screwups, there is alot of innovation!  When the day comes that the first truly virtual reality engine is released, it's going to be developed by these guys on a derivative of this engine.

Just a few weeks ago, I blogged about what I've seen as the recession of "graphical achievement" in games.  Certainly Far Cry 2 is one of the exceptions, and that's one of the reasons I love it so much, but it's also a great illustration as to what the future of hardware for games is going to concentrate on.  Some of the commentors on that post said that current graphics are good enough for them, and that they didn't know how it could get any better.  I say look at Far Cry 2, and let's talk about the horsepower that can be leveraged to scale this engine, not just for pure graphics, but for a more visceral environment (AI, physics).

I see the next big step forward as a closer integration of the "story" within the gameworld.  That's really where a lot of the problems are stemming from that people are complaining about (making choices, interacting with NPC's, endless respawning guards).  Make The Jackal a persistent "person" in that actually exists at all times that you have to "find", instead of just a piece of the narrative.  Make the neverending respawning guards be reinforcements that are dispatched from an actual location in the game world and have to drive to their posts.  In the scheme of things, these aren't big problems, and I bet with more development time available to them, the Ubisoft team would have had it done in FC2.  They've been very open about their process in many interviews in the media, and those guys knew where they were cutting corners to hit deadlines.

I just want to throw out there, too, that over a year ago there was a great conversation that was being had around if we can tell effective stories or have meaningful game experiences with guns.  I look at Far Cry 2 and Mirror's Edge, and see that we're watching the evolution of the FPS genre right now to a form of gameplay that doesn't necessarily require the "shooter", and places more of the emphasis on "first person".  That excites me.

And that's why Far Cry 2 was my game of the year for 2008.  These guys are my heroes right now, and I'll definitely be watching closely for the next iteration.

Labels:

6 Comments:

At 3/10/09 7:30 PM , Blogger Ben Abraham said...

Awesome post, Ed. I almost totally and unanimously agree (except that I appreciated the story and characters a teeny bit more than you seem to have). Great work.

 
At 3/10/09 8:57 PM , Blogger Ed Borden said...

Yeah the story was 100% lost on me. I know there were some random guys with English accents in there somewhere, and you eventually kill every person in the game at one time or another

 
At 3/17/09 8:45 AM , Blogger Keg said...

Ah, this post makes me want to play Far Cry 2 more than anything I've heard. I've seen some bad reviews, so I was a little shy, but this has totally swung me in the other direction. Guess I have something else to add to the Steam account.

Ken E.

 
At 5/6/09 7:06 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

I liked FC2 well enough to play it through to the end and then immediately start over again from the beginning. I've played many scripted games more than once but never back to back like that.

The story and particularly the ending of FC2 are lame. Beyond that the pacing takes some getting used to. At first, players complained that it was too hard and took to long to travel to the various missions. Those players are missing the game! While playing Oblivion, I never once rode a horse to get from point A to point B. I prefered to walk and soak up the, sometimes, breath taking environment. Similarly, I prefer to walk to missions in FC2. First, it's safer, but more importantly I paid for all those rocks and trees and stuff blowing in the wind with intricate shadows. Walking is the only way to appreciate them. If some guy gets to live an extra 10 minutes because I stopped to watch the sun's light creep into a canyon as it rises in the morning, he's still dead in the end.

With that said, all that unscripted graphic goodness still felt half baked. It bothers me when a single player game feels like a sparcely populated multiplayer map without the players. Crysis and even the original Far Cry felt the same way.

 
At 5/6/09 7:56 PM , Blogger Ed Borden said...

Hey, that's actually a really interesting way of putting it: It's like a multiplayer map with no other players.

I wonder, is that the difference between a game like this and something like Grand Theft Auto?

 
At 1/23/10 8:52 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is extremely interesting for me to read that post. Thank you for it. I like such topics and everything that is connected to them. I definitely want to read a bit more soon.

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

BY ED BORDEN
At the crossroads of tech and gaming.

View Ed Borden's LinkedIn profileAbout Me

   

post topics: