Red Faction II PC

User Score
5.7

Mixed or average reviews- based on 65 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 17 out of 65
  2. Negative: 18 out of 65
Buy On

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Sep 13, 2013
    5
    A solid action shooter but really does not stand out from similar games of the era.
    Was relatively popular due to the success of the original but really did not stick to its roots and a was a blatant cash in from publishers.

    No real link between this and the first, borrowing name only and you won't miss a great deal if you do not play this. Still provides some easy fast paced action.
  2. Ben
    Aug 9, 2009
    0
    Blew through it in 3 hours, visually poor and lacking any substance whatsoever. Loads of weapons but the game was so quick I didn't use half of em. The story is horrible and has no link to the original characters and barely mentions the Red Faction (which is now a political group or something). Do not buy this game.
  3. EdTha
    Jun 8, 2003
    9
    Great game... It gets together, the good things of almost every fps, ands adds interaction with teh sorroundings...
  4. MichaelA.
    May 10, 2007
    10
    One of the best if not the best first person shooters ever made. Multiplayer is amazing along with great 1 player mode. 10 out of 10.
  5. Feb 23, 2012
    1
    This game is terrible. The game is short. The maps are obtuse. The plot is generic and stupid. The enemies are either bullet sponges OR they are hidden around every corner and hit you almost immediately after you see them. The worst part of this game is how unsatisfying the guns are. I play FPS games to shoot things, and the shooting in this game is AWFUL.
  6. Jan 22, 2013
    2
    This game should not exist even logically. But logic aside, there's just nothing new, they just enhanced destruction physics a bit (and there's not much different) and added Jason Statehem (is that right?). Rushed story with not really polished gameplay equals - unworthy of it's first game sequel that must be avoided by any FPS or Sci-fi fans. Seriously, i passed through it, like after 4This game should not exist even logically. But logic aside, there's just nothing new, they just enhanced destruction physics a bit (and there's not much different) and added Jason Statehem (is that right?). Rushed story with not really polished gameplay equals - unworthy of it's first game sequel that must be avoided by any FPS or Sci-fi fans. Seriously, i passed through it, like after 4 hours, A.I. is broken and it's hard to die even if you'll try to, It's one of the first games, that used regeneration and you're just invincible there. Expand
  7. J.W.
    Aug 21, 2003
    10
    This game is awesome, I have it on my PS2, my friend has it on his PS2, I play it every time I go to his house, he plays it every time he comes to my house. How can the PC version be worse if it came out at a later date? You're all CRAZY!!!
  8. May 7, 2011
    10
    This game was amazing for it's time. Yes it is short, yes it doesn't have multiplayer. But who cares? When you can just terrorize the civilians? Or save them... The attention to detail is great. The music has some roots to the first game, but it has some of it's own tracks which are phenomenal. The story is interesting. The Geo Mod gives us nice looks, even though more scripted. I wouldThis game was amazing for it's time. Yes it is short, yes it doesn't have multiplayer. But who cares? When you can just terrorize the civilians? Or save them... The attention to detail is great. The music has some roots to the first game, but it has some of it's own tracks which are phenomenal. The story is interesting. The Geo Mod gives us nice looks, even though more scripted. I would recommend this only to people who like singleplayer experiences. People hate it for being less of the first game. But i played this one first and i know that the first game was bigger, but it laked detail and polish. While this is simply what the game probably should have been. I give it a 10/10 to keep the score higher then what it is. Expand
  9. Mormo
    May 3, 2006
    4
    After the 2 first level, ends up to predictive and boring.
  10. SirJP
    May 23, 2003
    1
    Buggy, unplayable, boring... It's lag on my GeForce4 Ti at 640x400!!!
  11. EliasO.
    Oct 8, 2006
    3
    It's a real bad console port, it's very tedious to play, and most of the time you're so frustrated by the awkard things that just kept happening while playing. I had to reload way too many times. When I need to reload becouse I died in a game, thats fine, I just try to refine my strategy. but when I need to reload becouse the game is acting up, thats just bad.
  12. JohnS
    Aug 13, 2009
    4
    Not worth a buy. Hardly ties into the 1st one, which was awesome for its time. To reply to J.W. - PC gamers tend to have pretty high standards when it comes to shooters, since shooters are like the PC's bread and butter. When a good console game gets badly ported over, it only irks us more.
  13. TerryD.
    Apr 18, 2003
    4
    Red faction II starts off well with some pretty cool action, but then runs out of gas towards the end when things start getting repetitive. This is particularly a problem when you consider how short the game is - which is VERY SHORT. One other thing, the manual and the interface were sometimes completely incomprehensible. What does "Press the 2 key to exit" mean? In my case this was the Red faction II starts off well with some pretty cool action, but then runs out of gas towards the end when things start getting repetitive. This is particularly a problem when you consider how short the game is - which is VERY SHORT. One other thing, the manual and the interface were sometimes completely incomprehensible. What does "Press the 2 key to exit" mean? In my case this was the action key, but other similar references were anyone?s guess. Also, which weapons had alt-fire and how were they supposed to be used? And why did the hints disappear from the screen before you could read them? Yikes!!! Expand
  14. ScottR.
    Nov 2, 2004
    6
    This game would be way better with online multiplayer!
  15. PL
    Sep 21, 2009
    1
    This game is horrible graphically if you have played Half Life, Left 4 Dead, or Far Cry to name a few. I felt like I was playing Castle Wolfenstein during the 1980's.
  16. Dec 28, 2014
    0
    Utter tripe, by today's standards and back then too. Everything looks like a burn victim, the acceleration on my mouse meant I couldn't aim properly, the cross-hair is too big. The list goes on, steer clear of this garbage.
  17. Kelemvor
    Mar 7, 2005
    5
    A bad console-port. The graphic is mediocre at best, you cannot save, there are only checkpoints on really dumb places, and the story is boring to. If you develop games for a console, please don't martyr the pc-community with such crappy ports.
  18. JoeS.
    Mar 24, 2003
    6
    Why would you buy this game and not any other FPS in the universe? Well its because of the GeoMod Technology right? Its the only game that has it right? Well this "new and revamped" geomod is non existant. All of the walls are "invincible" and I have not seen geomod throughout the game. If you want real geomod then buy the original RedFaction.
  19. Aug 26, 2014
    5
    Having played the first Red Faction, this was disappointing. This game is Red Faction in name only. First, the plot. It's completely goofy and too light-hearted, unlikely the gritty and dark story of the first. In the first game, you were an ordinary miner who probably had no combat experience. Here, you are a super soldier. The plot twist you'll see in this game was just pointless. ButHaving played the first Red Faction, this was disappointing. This game is Red Faction in name only. First, the plot. It's completely goofy and too light-hearted, unlikely the gritty and dark story of the first. In the first game, you were an ordinary miner who probably had no combat experience. Here, you are a super soldier. The plot twist you'll see in this game was just pointless. But that's the least of our problems. Here's comes my biggest gripe: lack of Geo-Mod. Seriously? The very thing that defined Red Faction is dumbed-down, almost non-existent. You can only destroy a couple of walls; that's it. This is inexcusable, especially that most of the game takes place within cities and urban areas. Geo-Mod would have been perfect here. The gameplay itself is okay, I guess. And no online multiplayer? Why, when the original RF had? You can play with bots, sure, but online should have been included alongside. As a RF game, it fails. I'm glad I got this for 99 cents. Maybe you should do the same. You want real Red Faction action? Get Red Faction 1 and Red Faction: Guerrilla. Expand
  20. Mar 11, 2014
    7
    Pros:
    - Fast paced, excellent arcade shooter with large variety of standard and more interesting weapons.
    - Destructible environments - Fun and intense game play - Cheats for a more over the top experience - You get to use a Mech - Offline Bot matches - Jason Statham is a voice actor in this Negatives - Too short, easily completed within 3-4 hours - Very linear - No ported
    Pros:
    - Fast paced, excellent arcade shooter with large variety of standard and more interesting weapons.
    - Destructible environments
    - Fun and intense game play
    - Cheats for a more over the top experience
    - You get to use a Mech
    - Offline Bot matches
    - Jason Statham is a voice actor in this

    Negatives
    - Too short, easily completed within 3-4 hours
    - Very linear
    - No ported co-op, even in offline local
    - Not much of a story

    Personal Preferences
    - It has a Helicopter and tank turret level
    - Outdated graphic - but has a charm to it
    - No actual reason for replaying the game apart from to use the cheats

    Conclusion:
    If you are looking for a quick, solid FPS game with loads of fast paced action and explosions, with a story that is good enough just to keep the ball rolling and don't mind older graphics and play style, then this game is for you. If you are looking for anything more than this, then you should probably look elsewhere.
    Expand
  21. Aug 10, 2014
    4
    I can't complain too loudly since I got this game on sale from Steam. It provided me with a few hours of so-so FPS fun. I finally chucked the game in frustration since I had to replay the same level one too many times. That is, after finishing a level and exiting the game, this silly game takes me back to this same completed level the next time I open the game. The save progress isI can't complain too loudly since I got this game on sale from Steam. It provided me with a few hours of so-so FPS fun. I finally chucked the game in frustration since I had to replay the same level one too many times. That is, after finishing a level and exiting the game, this silly game takes me back to this same completed level the next time I open the game. The save progress is non-existent. Didn't the programmers test their work? Little wonder the RF franchise didn't survive. Expand
  22. Jan 3, 2015
    1
    This game is utterly crap. It even succeeded in having a worse game play and graphics compared to its older predeccesor from 2001. There are only a couple of really bad fps and this one is on that list.
Metascore
64

Mixed or average reviews - based on 10 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 10
  2. Negative: 2 out of 10
  1. For those of you who are online multiplayer fans though, an offline botmatch may just be seen as unacceptable … and that’s what you get with RFII. That’s a shame since the first one was fantastic.
  2. Short is never good, no matter which context you put it in. And this game is short. It's penis-envy short. It's the shortest single-player FPS game I've ever played. A four hour gameplay experience for a retail product is like a 20 second sexual intercourse. It just doesn't feel right, and you feel cheated.
  3. 74
    Fun, certainly, but single-player is a bit too linear and bit too short, even if the combat is engaging, well-thought out, and generally intense.