User Reviews (1 - 11 of 25)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

A disappointing sequel

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 5 / 5
Date: October 02, 2003
Author: Amazon User

I own the first Red Faction and really enjoyed it. One of the best features of the ORIGINAL Red Faction was that you could play multiplayer games online. The biggest problem with the original Red Faction was that some creative gamers invented "cheats" which would allow them to gain serious advantages while playing multiplayer. The designers, although they released two separate patches, were never able to fix this problem. Fast forward to Red Faction 2... they fixed it! The designers decided to solve this problem by... eliminating the multiplayer feature entirely! Woo hoo, great solution guys. As a result, Red Faction 2 is half the game that the original was. THQ should hire some real programmers that can SOLVE problems, not run away from them. Do yourself a favor and buy the original Red Faction for PC. You can still play fun multiplayer games with friends that don't cheat.

What the...?

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 0 / 2
Date: May 03, 2005
Author: Amazon User

I was walking though a store one day and saw this game. Since I LOVED the first Red Faction I figured this game would be right up my alley. So I bought it... brought it home... installed it. NO MULTIPLAYER!? NOT EVEN LAN!? Lemme tell you... a FPS without a multiplayer option is like a bathroom without a toilet. If you are a person that plays FPSs for the multiplayer (as I do), do yourself a favor and skip this game. With so many better games out there including Counter Strike 1.6/Condition Zero/Source, Day of Defeat, Half Life 1 & 2, Far Cry, Battlefield Vietnam/1942, and Unreal (and I'm sure you'll be able to think of TONS more) you should just save your money and just keep playing the first Red Faction. Heck... even the original DOOM/DOOM 2/Final DOOM for PC had at least a multiplayer LAN option. THQ... what we're you thinking when you made this game?

Expectations...

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 0 / 0
Date: May 14, 2006
Author: Amazon User

If you have any expectations about this game from the first, AVOID IT AT ALL COSTS! You WILL be disappointed. They completely ruined the geomod system that made the first one what it was, and the gameplay flops as well. Boo!

A Little Disappointing

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 0 / 0
Date: July 06, 2007
Author: Amazon User

The first Red Faction was truly fascinating. I loved the idea of blowing a hole in the floor then going around an obstacle. This was less so. It was far more cartoon-y and less plot-driven. From reading the other reviews, I expected that much, but still wanted to play around in the geomod universe some more, which was the primary reason I bought it. had it not been dirt cheap, I'd have given it a miss.

Wow , the Geo-mod engine is reallyZZzzzzzz....

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 1 / 1
Date: April 13, 2003
Author: Amazon User

Better than Unreal? Maybe. As good as a current FPS title? No way. The game is too short, and blowing holes in walls gets real boring after a while. This game looks good however and the parts where you get to pilot tanks and hovercraft is pretty cool but the first game had a better, longer story.

Just a mediocre game with some nice graphics.

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 1 / 2
Date: May 01, 2003
Author: Amazon User

First off i should say that the original Red Faction is one of my all time fave videogames. It was an absolute masterful game.
But IMO volition should have never made a sequel for it. Some games dont need a sequel and Red Faction is one them. Nuff Said.

bah

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 1 / 3
Date: May 07, 2003
Author: Amazon User

i liked the first red faction alright. it had a lot of things going for it.. while the story may not have been the most original, the way the story unfolded was fun to watch and participate in. the geo-mod technology was fine, and it provided several options in most areas as far as how to get to the next room. the multiplayer was a blast, and all the mods people were coming up with were fun to mess around with.

it wasn't the best game in the world, but it was better than most, and it had heart.

but this.. this game is an insult. the story is nonexistant, the A.I. is terrible, the weapons are unnecessary (it's not too difficult to kill anything with any gun), and it is one of the most linear games that i've played in a while. everything that happens in this game happens because it's the only way it CAN happen. there is no room for skill, strategy, or fun in this game. it's truly nothing more than a mindless "bullets and blood" shooter. that's fine and dandy.. but the way the developers have tried to pawn this off as something else is ludicrous. first off.. there is far LESS use of the geo-mod system in this game.. not MORE, as the pre-release reviews stated. and what little use of it there is, is completely pointless, because there aren't very many hidden areas or alternate routes that can be found by "geo-modding" through the walls like there were in the first game.

secondly.. the box hints (in rather dodgy language) that there are multiplayer type games to be found here. but there are NONE. sure.. you can play Deathmatch and Capture the Flag with RF2.. but not online.. you can only play it with a bunch of poorly made A.I. bots. what a gyp! why bother including a multiplayer part of the game IF YOU CAN'T PLAY AGAINST OTHER PEOPLE? Rediculous!

if you're wanting nothing more out of a game than pointless blood and gore with a plethora of huge honkin' guns to kill enemies that move with the intelligence of the old Contra enemies, and fake multiplayer against bots that either run around like idiots or camp like boy scouts, then this game delivers in SPADES.

if, however, your taste in games is a little more, shall we say, refined, then wait.. please wait.. there are a few titles coming out this year that seem promising.. most notably Deus Ex: Invisible War, the sequel to the most intelligent action game ever made.

heck.. anything would be more thought provoking and challenging than Red Faction 2. it's not worth the plastic it's pressed on.

This is a disappointment.

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 1 / 3
Date: May 09, 2004
Author: Amazon User

Found this game in a store today, was exicted, since it's hard to find this game in stores now. So I just grabbed it off the shelf and bought it, without reading the back or anything (which doesn't help), get home, install it, load it up, and notice theres NO multiplayer option, not even LAN, unlike the original Red Faction, it supported Mutliplayer/LAN which made the game, since the single player mode was pretty boring after beating it once. THQ, Violation, you need to come up with a patch/update for this game if you don't want your reputation smashed. This is horrible guys, come on. The engine is too slow, it's like a cheap Quake III: Arena engine in slow motion. Skip this game people, if you don't have Red Faction, get that. If you do have Red Faction, some other games you might like is RTCW (Return to Castle Wolfenstein), Quake III: Arena, or Far Cry.

terrible, terrible game

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 5 / 7
Date: April 13, 2003
Author: Amazon User

I'll be short. I bought the first Red Faction for the PS2 and it was a great game. Action packed, decent story and great weapons. I'm not sure what happened to the sequel though.

1. The graphics were terrible (blocky, repeated textures, looked like it was running the Quake 2 engine). The weapons look like they are made of 20 polygons and 1 texture.
2. the enemy AI didn't even exist. They just stood there and kept shooting at you even though you're shooting back.
3. Terrible computer interface. It's not hard to use, it's just really basic, and designed like it was a PS2 or Xbox game.
4. Even though you can save your game at any point, when you die, you restart at the beginning of the level! What in the world? And you only have 1 save game slot! Excuse me, my 60 gig hard drive can fit more on one game at a time. This isn't a 8mb memory card.
5. The geo-mod engine which allows you to destroy the environment only works on about 20% of the time. Only certain walls or floors can be destroyed. Most of the time, you just leave a black burnt mark on the object you're trying to blow up with your giant rocket launcher!
6. No multiplayer - instead you get to play with a bunch of bots. Great...

Overall this is weak game in a very crowded market of first person shooters. There are literally dozens of alternatives that play, look, run, and feel better than this pitiful excuse for a game. Try unreal 2, castle wolfenstein, battlefield 1942, tribes 2, unreal tournament 2003, ravenshield, etc. instead of wasting $... on this game.

The only redeeming feature is that you get to kill alot of people with a variety of guns. But after a day or two this game gets boring really fast.

Ups and downs.

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 3 / 4
Date: April 28, 2003
Author: Amazon User

Well, i played it. I enjoyed the graphics. Sound effects were clean. Explosions were loud and messy. The engine used to cut holes any and everywhere was better than in the first. But, i just couldn't get into it. Very different from the first game. For some, that's what they wanted. But, i enjoyed the first game much more. This one was too short. 8 hours to finish it for me. Almost all in one day. I was dissapointed when it was over. Not because i wanted more. But because i knew i'd never play it again. THE BIGGEST SORE SPOT : No instant save system built in. I might have enjoyed this more if they had carried over the quick save that us pc gamers are so lucky to be able to use. It's one of the few tangible things we have over the console systems! Well, other than graphics, and , usually our prices are cheaper for software too. Don't take that away from us too! I WANT MY QUICKSAVE!

Review Page: 1 2 3 Next 

Actions