Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
But the list of dislikes isn't long or very critical. I just didn't overly enjoy the series. The storytelling was forgettable and I didn't care about the protagonist or any of the antagonists at any point in any of the games. I know that sounds harsh but the games weren't for me is all. I should also mention that paranormal lore has never done a thing for me. I do admit that this obviously affected my overall impression on the series, but things flying off shelves and the warping about that these wraiths do and other common occurrences in the paranormal metaverse are rarely done in a way that add value to the story being told.
F.3.A.R. switched it up a little and was interesting for a minute, but my opinion of the "second half" of the game is that Day 1 blew an incredible opportunity. I mean really blew it. And, again speaking for myself, degraded the integrity of the rest of the game.
Aaaanyway...if you didn't like what you saw, you probably won't like the rest of the series.
So you try and create a better game using 2005 technology (no offense, I'm just saying)...
For its time. F.E.A.R. was far ahead of anything else. Its, physics/lighting/A.I. was amazing.
F.E.A.R 2: Project Origin was definitely a perfect, well rounded game in the single-player aspect. Its improved graphics and difficulty is a welcome change coupled with the continuation of the story, a fun protagonist, and fun gameplay made it a great game.
F.E.A.R 3 was well... different. It wasnt horrible and it was good to have some closeure to the story, but it due to the fact that it was released during the "high-point of consoles" (which lasted about a month since the PC, as usual, toppled them) F.E.A.R 3 ended up feeling to focused on multi-player/CO-OP. Sure the SP was fun, but the game was meant to be played with more people and the focus on "ranking-up" COD style was a bit disappointing. However, it was fun to kill Archaham Tech Soldiers and Replicas and seeing an end to the story was a plus (even though the end left it open to interpretation).
In my opinion F.E.A.R is a great franchise (even if the third game fell short of expectations).
Personally, I find the second game the best well rounded (story, gameplay, characters, graphics, etc...). However, F.E.A.R (the first) will always hold a place in my heart as one of the best FPS games of all time (yes no true award for F.E.A.R 3... another than a thanks for ending the story... I guess).
Just my two cents.
F.E.A.R franchise is a great group of games with fun characters, amazing gameplay, and a intriguing story (full of twist; PAY ATTENTION TO THE STORY!).
Play them through. You wont regret it.
- Jack Harper
Half Life 1 was made in 1998, it became one of the best FPS of all time.
Half Life 2 was made in 2004 (a year before the amentioned technology) and became on of the best FPS of all time.
It doesn't matter what the graphics are physics were like, it matters what the gameplay is like.
Still, Half Life 2 looked amazing at the time. Anyway, I can understand that if you play the first F.E.A.R. now it might not be that impressive. But as Jack Harper said, you've got to judge it in its own time. I think I remember the game was criticized for the bland and repetitive environments, but the combat was very good, with smooth gunplay and intelligent enemy AI (for the time). Also, the paranormal stuff and the general atmosphere was well done and pretty unique.
As for F.E.A.R. 2, I personally quite enjoyed it. I still think it looks pretty good, especially some of the lighting effects. But I don't think it's special in any way. It's a nice ride, but I never cared much for the characters or the story. I just liked the Alma scenes and the dark atmosphere.
I never played F.3.A.R. When I read the review I thought it wasn't for me. The whole co-op thing didn't appeal to me and they reduced all the paranormal stuff with Alma. I suppose they went for too much cheap scares in F.E.A.R. 2, but that didn't really bother me.
But to react to the first comment, I don't think you should play F.E.A.R. 2 if you really think the first F.E.A.R. was that horrible. You're probably not going to find enough change to satisfy your needs. I can't judge F.3.A.R. But well, back in 2005 the first F.E.A.R. was a top shooter and a widely praised game. Judging by your arguments, I'd say you value good story delivery and well written characters, which I suppose wasn't F.E.A.R.'s strongest point... F.E.A.R. 2 isn't going to improve much on that, I think.
I failed to see the point...
Half-Life 1 was made in 1998 and it did become one of the best FPS games of all time...
Half - Life 2 had great, no amazing graphics, but it was the story that made it the greatest FPS.
But I fail to see how this ties in.
When I speak of game technology, I am refering to games in general during that era...
No game company, other than VALVE had access to the SOURCE Engine...
They all had to use their own tech and they all were pretty horrible looking (but it was 2005... you cant blame them). FEAR looked remarkable for its time.
I stated all this in my above comment, because if you read the first comment you will see that he is disgusted by FEAR for many technical as well as gameplay reasons...
I never once said gameplay doesnt matter, infact if you read my previous comment, I spoke of FEAR's amazing AI and CO-OP gameplay that was my main arguement against FEAR 3...
Again I dont mean to be rude, I think I am just missing your point...
Yes both Half-life 1 and 2 were top rated for gameplay, but I stated the fact that Sierra/Monolith had ttechnical limitations back in 2005...
I mean, if Half-Life 2 were made now, they could have improved on alot of things (dont take this as an insult, HL2 is my favorite shooter, I'm just stating...).
If you wanted to go with the "Gameplay over Graphics" approach, then you should have stated how much fan-base the original DOOM still has (even I still play it)...
Your comment basically agreed with mine...
In case you mistook my comment, I basically was giving a brief review... explaining gameplay and technological based pros/cons...
I do not understand the nature of your comment, if you can clarify, made I can grasp it better.
You are stating nothing I dont already know... infact I never once said anything like "well I know FEAR had horrible gameplay, but the graphics were great!" ( I said both were amazing...) I simply stated that it had great graphics for its time... if you read the rest of the comment you will see that I also supported FEAR gameplay...
I never said gameplay should be beaten by graphics... please clarify your comment.
- Jack Harper
I agree...
FEAR is one of my least favorite games while FEAR 2 is my favorite game ever along with HL2.
Are you kidding? Doom is incredibly fun and is a genuinely great game the only reason people ♥♥♥♥♥ about Doom 3 BFG is because like all other modern id games doom 3 bfg is nearly impossible to run on an ati card
Um... no offense but you couldn't be more wrong.
DOOM 1,2,3, and ROE were amazing. They defined shooting games for generations. Slaughtering Demons is at its best in DOOM. From the environments, to the weapons, to the demons, the DOOM series was remarkable.
The "lame key card thing" disagreement can not be used here. DOOM was using that WAY before any other game franchise blew it out of proportion.
Plus, you if are stating you don't like the mechanic of getting key cards, look at it from their perspective. DOOM came out in the 90's. You try and make a more complex level desig with that tech. Honestly, ID was the best. Look at how detailed their environments were back then.
You have to remember, unlike BIOSHOCK and TES, DOOM is no longer around, so any arguement made against it backfires as you are comparing it to games today, even though DOOM pioneered most game features for this generation.
The DOOM franchise is a master piece in itself. With the tech in the 90's I really do not know how they managed to make such a wonderful game.
DOOM 3 ranks as one of the best games to date. The horror aspect was a welcome form of gameplay, and the environments, weapons, demons, and the DOOMGUY were great! I see nothing wrong with any of the 3 1/2 DOOM games (4 1/2 if you count BFG).
To say it has not aged well can not stand. DOOM 3 BFG was not a new game, it was an update and was treated like so. Except for some extra things here and there, it was not a new game and ID did not advertise it that way. DOOM has not aged at all for years. If you really want to get technical, then just look at the millions of people who release mods everyday... I think if the game didn't age well we would not have great mods like X-MASS/Classic DOOM 3... the game is aging perfectly.
I, personally, have lost hope for DOOM 4 however. I feel like they are no longer working on it . Like HL3, DOOM 4 would probably get little sales. Think about it. No person this generation knows what real gaming is. THey play COD and consider that the best game. THey have never played Mokney Island, DOOM, QUAKE, Heretic...
THose are non- existant to them. Then a true game like BIOSHOCK:INFINTIE comes out, we get the "that was horrible the ending made no sense why couldnt he just kill everyone that would have been better" because most people can not think outside the box...
It is a shame, but it is the world...
Just my two cents...
- Jack Harper
ANYWAY.
As a serious fan of the franchise, all I can tell someone who isn't with the program is this
a) Learn to read. I mean reading. As in subtext.
All of the FEAR games are laden with subtext in every corner of their writing. As they say, pay close attention.
b) Bland shootouts? ♥♥♥♥♥♥' GET IN THERE COWARD AND STOP HIDING. Your kung-fu is all OHK. Combo this with the gunplay and slow motion control, and (iff you know what you're doing and can keep your hat on), every fight is intense and unique.
c) The horror seriously drops off in the third game, but if you're on-board, it's an eye-opening trip.