F.E.A.R.

Nightshade · Post by **Nightshade** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 1:29 am

I have the following games to try out:

FEAR
Call of Duty 2
Quake 4

The first one I've tried so far is FEAR.

FEAR has no story or narrative to start out, rather small cutscenes throughout the game play. The game engine used is the one from DOOM III and is kinda choppy even with the recommended settings.

Let me tell you that compared to DOOM III, FEAR is pretty weak. There's no fear in this game...the graphics are kinda bland and don't make good use of the engine. The story...weak as well. Not giving too much away, but it's kind of a mish-mash mix of genetic manipulation and ghost story. Weak...

Multiplayer is weak as well. It's DOOM III's game play with more conventional weapons. There is no "bullet time" effect like in single play (probably because it would be impossible and annoying at best if it were included.)

Overall, FEAR is DOOM III "Lite" and that does nothing to impress me.

F.E.A.R. is W.E.A.K.

Tetrad · Post by **Tetrad** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 1:37 am

I disagree with you but won't bother to explain why.

Vertigo 99 · Post by **Vertigo 99** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 1:44 am

Tetrad wrote:I disagree with you but won't bother to explain why.

this expresses my opinion pretty well

Diedel · Post by **Diedel** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:16 am

I've only read good things about FEAR so far.

So you say it's really worse than the gameplay-wise already pathetic DOOM 3 ...

... hard to accomplish, if you ask me.

Pun · Post by **Pun** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 11:23 am

I think you'll find that quake 4 is just as weak. The game really has no subtance whatsoever. Half Life 2 blows it away. Of course, I thought Doom 3 sucked too.

Diedel · Post by **Diedel** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 11:47 am

Ummm ... but Quake 4 is a <u>multi</u>player game?

Repo Man · Post by **Repo Man** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 12:04 pm

I played F.E.A.R. all the way through a few weeks ago. It was spooky. I liked it more than Doom 3. From what I have read about it, F.E.A.R. does not use the Doom 3 engine; they developed their own.

I also played Quake 4 through as well. I wasn't too thrilled with it either, but it did have nice playability. However, I will give the Q4 developers kudos on the flashlight; they figured-out how to attach the flashlight to the gun!

I have had no desire to play either Quake 4, Doom 3 or F.E.A.R. over again. Half-Life 2 is a different story! I have played that game from start to finish five times already. It's only the sandlion section of HL2 that gets tiresome for me--that is, of course, until you get that squeeze ball thingy to command them!

CDN_Merlin · Post by **CDN_Merlin** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 12:10 pm

Quake 4 has a very good single player. It's not Q3.

I've heard good things about FEAR also and trust me, DOOM 3 sucked. I actually payed for it

Vertigo 99 · Post by **Vertigo 99** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 1:12 pm

i don't know why people don't understand that the flashlight in doom3 is not MEANT to be attached to the gun.

its a trade off; the comfort of being able to see or the comfort of being able to shoot something, they designed it that way.

Repo Man · Post by **Repo Man** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 1:24 pm

Vertigo 99 wrote:i don't know why people don't understand that the flashlight in doom3 is not MEANT to be attached to the gun.

its a trade off; the comfort of being able to see or the comfort of being able to shoot something, they designed it that way.

Ummm... Our primitive 20th and 21st century small arms have mountable flashlights for operations in dark environments. I guess it became a lost art by the 23rd century.

The flashlight arrangement in Doom 3 just became a pain in the butt after a while that took a lot of fun out of the game for me. Besides, why have all those beautiful graphics if you can't see most of it? It was a stupid design decision on ID's part which was corrected by the Quake 4 developers.

Ah geeze, let's don't re-hash the arguments over the Doom 3 flashlight!

Diedel · Post by **Diedel** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 2:34 pm

Vertigo 99 wrote:i don't know why people don't understand that the flashlight in doom3 is not MEANT to be attached to the gun.

its a trade off; the comfort of being able to see or the comfort of being able to shoot something, they designed it that way.

It's a pathetic way to make a game difficult because they failed to make it 'really' difficult. HL-1 was very scary w/o such lame tricks. I went blind after 5 minutes of playing Doom3 in the dark, so I got myself a duct tape mod.

But duct tape mod or not - Doom3 lives from a decade old game principle, and a particularly boring implementation of it.

Testiculese · Post by **Testiculese** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 2:42 pm

COD2 is pretty good, the character animation is great. Their mouths move properly to their words.

What I don't like about it is that the FOV seems narrowed, and the crosshair is too thick and obscuring.

Top Wop · Post by **Top Wop** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 2:42 pm

Doom 3 was boring and not scary. They could have done many things differently and at least revolutionize the gameplay for the advanced age in gaming. But alas with all of the funding and advantage they had they did not. Only reason why I paid for mine was for the Thief mod "The Dark Mod".

http://www.mindplaces.com/darkmod/

That mod is the only reason why you should have Doom 3 still installed on your comptuer. Or at least until it comes out.

Nexus_One · Post by **Nexus_One** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 6:19 pm

FEAR doesn't even use the DOOM 3 engine, completely different developers. FEAR uses it's own engine, which IMHO is far superior to DOOM 3's. As for the game, it was outstanding, graphics were amazing, and the weapons were great as well. And there were a few parts that scared the ★■◆● out of me. TB, do some homework before dissing a game as good as FEAR, I expected more of you.

XSabre · Post by **XSabre** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 6:26 pm

Doom 3 was boring and not in the least bit scary. As for the whole flashlight deal, from what i remember in an interview they said that it was at first due to hardware and framerate limitations back when they first started the game. The dynamic lights and whatnot put a strain on the graphics cards at that time. Later on as technology advanced they were going to add the light to the guns, but they didnt for some reason, heh.

I bought FEAR and was much more impressed with that. The story, while not the best storyline i'll admit, was decent enough and kept my interest. The game did spook me from time to timeas well. The slowmo "bullet-time" effect was a nice little touch considering the gunfights in this game can get pretty hectic at times. As for its multiplayer, its pretty much a run and gun type of play; pretty decent paced. Oh, and there IS the slowmo-bullet time in multiplayer. You just have to search for a server with it turned on. Basically only 1 person in game at a time can have it and in order for you to acquire it you have to kill that person.

Behemoth · Post by **Behemoth** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 7:23 pm

I want to play Unreal 2007 =)

Nightshade · Post by **Nightshade** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 12:30 am

lol

You must be easily amused. FEAR is such garbage. Bored the hell outta me.

fyrephlie · Post by **fyrephlie** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 12:40 am

you guys should check out mario bros. 19, they took the old gameplay and improved the graphics, sorta....

really, doom3 is great, if it was the first time you ever played the doom series. but it is what it is. doom on steroids. i didnt like the flashlight gun switching, and hated missing out on all the wonderful graphics they put in it. seemed silly to me as well. dark =/= scary ... good timing and scripting == scary.

f.e.a.r. looks good to me, but i have only seen some gameplay footage.

why are we talking about doom3? it came out in like a while ago... this should all have been covered here

Tetrad · Post by **Tetrad** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 1:29 am

ThunderBunny wrote:You must be easily amused. FEAR is such garbage. Bored the hell outta me.

Huh, I feel exactly the same way but about Doom3. Go figure!

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 5:40 pm

the AI in FEAR is pretty smart. enough to keep ya guessin, which is a good thing.

that and it runs like buttah even on an xp1700+ if ya know how to configure it right.

Nightshade · Post by **Nightshade** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 5:45 pm

Then again, I hated Halo- so I guess all the kiddies like this kinda thing.

Tetrad · Post by **Tetrad** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:01 pm

I didn't like Halo either I don't know why you bring that up. :p

Vertigo 99 · Post by **Vertigo 99** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:59 pm

halo sucks, lol.

but now we're starting to go down this path again and its not a path i think any of us want to go down, again.

fliptw · Post by **fliptw** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:13 pm

what does this game do that Max Payne hasn't already done?

Kyouryuu · Post by **Kyouryuu** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:01 am

F.E.A.R. has nothing to do with Doom 3. It was produced by Monolith and uses Monolith's LithTech engine. Although I think it's a third-generation implementation of the engine, previous LithTech games included the No One Lives Forever series, Alien vs. Predator 2, and Shogo: Mobile Armor Division.

It's also a pretty frightening game in ways that Doom 3 isn't. Most of the environments are actually rather pedestrian (darkened office spaces, warehouses) turned upside-down by freaky enemies and a pervading darkness. It also boasts some of the most intense gunfights I've ever seen in a first-person shooter, reminding me a lot of the infamous lobby scene in The Matrix. And whereas Doom 3 tried to scare the player with an "ooga-booga!" moment around every corner, F.E.A.R. correctly realizes that sometimes the scariest moments are when things you expect don't happen.

There are also some nice Half-Life 2-like plot devices. For example, when you stalk through the haunted offices, you can hear friends and loved ones leave answering machine messages of increasing desperation ("When are you coming home?" descends into "Have you seen that thing on TV? We're really worried! Are you alright?").

Nightmare USA · Post by **Nightmare USA** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 7:28 am

I could not disagree with your take on that game more. This game is awesome and there are no performance issues on my machine...

Here is a review I wrote Nov 26th that has a few screenshots and also a Teaser Trailer for the game. here You all should check it out!

BigSlideHimself · Post by **BigSlideHimself** » Sat Dec 03, 2005 1:57 am

Can anyone here say anything bad about Half Life 2? I was thinking of picking it up next, heard a bad thing or two, and wanted to know what the consensus was now that it's been out awhile.

Also, can I pick it up used? Last I heard you had to buy it straight from the website and couldn't play a used copy.

fliptw · Post by **fliptw** » Sat Dec 03, 2005 2:00 am

you can buy it new in stores

but you can't buy it used.

Vertigo 99 · Post by **Vertigo 99** » Sat Dec 03, 2005 2:20 am

there are 0 reasons to not buy HL2.

Do it.

Topher · Post by **Topher** » Sat Dec 03, 2005 3:35 am

HL2 > *

Pun · Post by **Pun** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 2:02 pm

Ditto. Buy it.

Matrix · Post by **Matrix** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 2:09 pm

In all of the hours I've spent in HL2, Doom3, Quake4, and FEAR. I enjoy HL2 10 fold over the rest of them, both in MP and SP.
The game just looks so much better then the rest, much better story, and theres nothing like killing 12 ppl in a row with saw blades from the gravity gun

DCrazy · Post by **DCrazy** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 5:19 pm

The bits of F.E.A.R. that I've played (the first couple of "levels") remind me a lot of HL2, but HL2's storytelling was a bit more seamless. Overall, I think HL2 is a more refined game.

F.E.A.R. = Max Payne's Bullet Time + Doom 3's otherworldly creepiness + HL2's storytelling devices.

It's pretty derivative but it works.

Diedel · Post by **Diedel** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 5:34 pm

Vertigo 99 wrote:there are 0 reasons to not buy HL2.

Whut?

I found it very - make that: totally - linear and for large parts rather a playable tech demo than a game. You had this endless water speeder passage with arcadish stuff like the helo dropping bombs on you ... it felt like space invaders on steroids. Childish. Then the maps lost a lot of credibility for me when I discovered that there was no environment. Everything is a facade. I once stacked all crates I found and climbed them to find that there was just some blue default texture in areas you weren't supposed to see, and the rear sides of houses were open ... I tried noclip to follow a strider and could observe it circle a house into nowhere.

On the other hand it has parts that are incredibly well done and atmosperic. The zombie town was some of the best passages I've ever seen in a game.

The end however was kind of anticlimactic. Physics demo more than game.

And it was too short, especially if compared to HL1.

But it's still worth buying it.

Me playing through it two times means it cannot be that bad (I never played any single player game more than once with the exception of HL-1, HL-2, and Descent 2).

Vertigo 99 · Post by **Vertigo 99** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:32 pm

Sigh. Why does linear make a game bad? It tells a story. Story's are often linear.

I thought the bomb dropping part was awesome.

And yea, you can ruin a movie for yourself if you go up into the projector room and open up the projector and look at how it ticks, but why would you do that?

I didn't think the end was anticlimatic at all.

Is the game perfect? of course not. Is it the best damn game out and is it 99% flawless? ima go with "yes."

[]V[]essenjah · Post by **[]V[]essenjah** » Mon Dec 05, 2005 1:01 pm

Diedel wrote:
Vertigo 99 wrote:there are 0 reasons to not buy HL2.
Whut?

I found it very - make that: totally - linear and for large parts rather a playable tech demo than a game. You had this endless water speeder passage with arcadish stuff like the helo dropping bombs on you ... it felt like space invaders on steroids. Childish. Then the maps lost a lot of credibility for me when I discovered that there was no environment. Everything is a facade. I once stacked all crates I found and climbed them to find that there was just some blue default texture in areas you weren't supposed to see, and the rear sides of houses were open ... I tried noclip to follow a strider and could observe it circle a house into nowhere.

On the other hand it has parts that are incredibly well done and atmosperic. The zombie town was some of the best passages I've ever seen in a game.

The end however was kind of anticlimactic. Physics demo more than game.

And it was too short, especially if compared to HL1.

But it's still worth buying it. Me playing through it two times means it cannot be that bad (I never played any single player game more than once with the exception of HL-1, HL-2, and Descent 2).

I actually agree with this. You have a good point. I felt like the endless waterboat thing was annoying with the bomb-dropping chopper. It just ran itself out after a while. I also didn't like the entire beginning to the game, nor the end. The best parts of the game were between when you enter Black Mesa and the very end. I felt like the ending really didn't have any depth to it really. Just sorta left me standing there going... ok? Multiplayer is freaking fun though!!

Doom 3, was very scary but very gimmicky. I just didn't like it that much. Felt like a tech demo although it was very scary in some areas. It was a fun game but not worth $50.

I haven't played Doom 4 yet. I thought about it but decided against it.

STFU about Halo.

It is probably the most non-linear game in here. And it is still pretty linear. It is the best game on console just as HL-2 is the best game on PC.

Half-Life 2 is still the best game out there. I would suggest it if you get it.

What am I waiting for though? Oblivion.

16 square miles of pure non-linear, go wherever you want and be anyone you want goodness. Over 200 dungions, realistic sword combat, over 1500+ non-player characters with dynamic conversations that actually have their own jobs and goals and lead their own day to day lives without any scripting involved, all AI baby!! Forests that grow themselves, where rocks form and plants grow, everything within the forests react to weather changes and move with wind with lush beauty that has never been produced in any game.

9 major cities and a large number of other populated areas to explore.... Full voice acting for every character including the voice of Patrick Stewart. YUBYUB, it's all gonna be mine baby!!

fyrephlie · Post by **fyrephlie** » Mon Dec 05, 2005 1:18 pm

i loved hl2 ... i have played through it numerous times. i agree that its limited in its environment, but i feel that has something to do with the physics engine, and the trade off is worth it for me.

can i suggest ... umm and don't jump on me ... but farcry? i found it very open and 'pretty', the 'monsters' were fairly 'pedestrian', but the environment was great. i enjoyed the game quite a bit.

doom3 didnt excite me much, but i liked it just the same.

you know what was a fairly linear game? descent 2, i mean jesus, get this key, now get this key, now blow up a reactor. man oh man, what were they thinking? the whole time you are just stuck in this mine?

i don't think its fair to focus on negatives, (which i am glad you didnt deidel), but whether the negatives still allow for a great game. i can think of plenty of games that could have been great, but XXX was just impossible to work around.

/opinion