BASED ON STEAM VERSION because that's the version I played first ...It's not well optimized and Gentlemen of the Row community patch adds more problems than it fixes. I get that people praise it because it fixes a lot of issues but it doesn't *really* make the game more stable and easier to play. It just makes the game more inconsistent on when it does decide to crash or not work. The base game aside from that is really unstable, especially for later systems(I think I first tried it on Vista?). It really doesn't run all that well. I'll comment on where I place this in the Saints Row Series. From best to worst : Saints Row 3, Saints Row 2, Saints Row 4, haven't played Saints Row 1. This game, to put it simply, is one of the best and most fun games I have ever played. It's, what, San Andreas but a different take on the open world gangster shtick? This game is to GTA what Postal is to... FPS games, I guess. I remember first loading this game up(which wasn't even in the last decade, believe it or not) and I was amazed at how fun it was, with all of the minigames, collectibles, and side stuff to do. The missions are all just really fun and hilarious, and the character in unforgettable, especially Shandi. The gameplay has always been really good in the Saints Row too, so I only have high praises for how fun the game is to play. Now, as I was checking my Steam purchase date of this game, I noticed a news stub that said Volition found "long-lost Saint Row 2 source code, pledges to fix notoriously wonky PC port", so... There's some luck there. Volition detoured away from this game's roots with Saints Row 3 and 4, but maybe this potential fix of Saints Row 2 will reignite their love for parodying GTA/gangster games. We need more of Volition's magic touch. For the time being, however, I can't genuinely recommend this version. Go out and buy a used PS2, and then buy this game for PS2. More worth it than buying this version.
Farcry 2 is where the series took off like a rocket. It sounds weird to say it like that as it's the second game, but I don't ever recall the first game being particularly well received. I never even knew it existed(aside from the 2 in the name) because it was overshadowed by this game's popularity. This game, however, was very well received. I personally think a little too much, as I don't think this is a very good *game*. I won't stress the details but the gunplay is frustrating for all of the right reasons(gun jams, easy to run out of ammo, aiming isn't snap-quick, enemies are bullet sponges), endlessly spawning enemies are a constant threat, and it's incredibly easy to die even when you've got really good guns and you're facing a single enemy. All of that said, this isn't a particularly good *game* but it's got a great narrative about war torn countries and mercenaries, but most important weapon trafficking and disease(specifically malaria because you're in Africa). It's a more realistic game overall especially in story, and the later Far Cry's put less emphasis on story which is sad because Far Cry 2 is Mercenary's Playground without the destruction and humour. The story in FC2 really is amazing but the game is hampered by it's terrible gameplay. I think Far Cry 3 is the antithesis to this game. Far Cry 2 game has more emphasis on atmosphere and story while the gameplay is incredibly frustrating and isn't particularly player-friendly. Far Cry 3 is the complete opposite. The story isn't Far Cry 3's shining crown by far. Far Cry 3 took the gameplay of Far Cry 2 and modernized it and mainstreamed it. Do I think this is bad? No, I don't. I think what's bad is that the story suffered in return. If they kept the great story and atmosphere trend of 2, with the great gameplay of 3, it would've been amazing. If the way I explained Far Cry 2 sounds great, then I suggest it. I guess some people will disagree with how I explained it but it's the way I experienced it.
