People greatly exaggerate how good the AI is in this game

[Viperr101]

I played F.E.A.R. back in 06 or 07, whenever the multiplayer community was still active. I never made it far in the singleplayer back then since the game scared the ♥♥♥♥ out of me as a kid, but I still played about 3 chapters worth of the game.

Now that I've replayed up that point, it's obvious that people are giving this game's AI way too much credit.

I'm playing on extreme difficulty and have rarely encountered any of these "epic gunfight" moments everyone is so adament about. So far the only times I've died have been due to the AI shooting me down instantly from half way across the map, shooting me after they're already dying as if their gun has homing bullets or they're pulling some ♥♥♥♥ move from the movie Wanted, a grenade which is impossible to avoid, or the occasional enemy that somehow spawns behind me even when I'm covering all the possible flanks. Normally I still have 7 medkits on me while being at full health. I haven't even used slow-mo a single time this playthrough and ended up just unbinding the key.

The gunplay is also nothing special. I'd argue hl2 has better gunplay and came out a year prior to FEAR. That and the enemies have extremely jankey movement when running or maneouvering around the map. And their max run speed is seemingly twice your max movement speed.

The mini-boss battles are ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ attrocious. Nearly as bad as the bosses in Deus Ex: HR.

The AI in this game boils down to two scenarios. The first scenario is them running towards the nearest path in order to reach you at melee distance. The second is you shooting them down during which time they can't shoot back. So how is this AI still good? Because it makes an effort to walk around the map while not paying attention to you so you can easily kill them?

As for the AI using the environment, there have been very few moments so far. They'll stand behind the occassional crate or wall, but beyond that there's rarely moments where they jump over balconies or through windows. I saw one guy crawl prone underneath a shelf while I was standing right in his view making him a free kill since they can't actually do anything while performing these environment movements.

In addition, the map design can be extremely dull and uninspiring. There's parts of the game where you're just walking around a baren level for 3-5 minutes picking up some medkits, grenades, or armor and there's not an enemy in sight. Not even attempted jump scares.

I will say this game had some amazing multiplayer back in the day. That's when ♥♥♥♥ was tense. As for the singleplayer? Extremely overrated, bordering on moments of tedium that make me question how this game ever got so much attention for its AI.

This game is by no means bad, but it's also not amazing by any stretch of the imagination. The AI will not give you a refreshing experience when compared to any modern games. A few modern titles that have just as good AI are Bioshock Infinite, DOOM, Borderlands, and Rage which I would consider to be some of the best in a modern title. All those games have AI which utilizes the environment in a much better way.

Perhaps if the gunplay was better then the AI might have more room to shine, but as it stands, it feels more like a walking shooting gallery than a unique or exciting challenge.

[The Brown Hornet]

The enemies flank and take cover, that was impressive in 2000 whatever

[Pulptenks]

dunno why ppl still comparing maps, scenes, sounds, graphics, etc from a 12yo game with recent titles...

[Viperr101]

This is my point. The game may have been good for the time, but even then it's still not great. So why the ♥♥♥♥ are people still acting like this ♥♥♥♥ is good in 2017? This was posted 2 ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ days ago for christs sake https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2017/04/03/why-fears-ai-is-still-the-best-in-first-person-shooters/

[jgk95]

Forgive the brevity of my response, but at the time it was truly "THE AI" to beat.

The nearest AI of any competitor at the time was HalfLife 2 and this software engine's intelligence coupled with graffix that were clearly head and shoulders above HL2 gave the percieved attitude that this truly was a superior gaming experience to anything Valve had to offer. In many HL2 scenarios, in an oncoming charge from the soliers in black n white camo, one would predictably run right past you & turn around in an effort to "box" you in. Invariably, that soldier was always the first to die. Comparitively, in F.E.A.R. that never happened and the enemy AI had both the intelligence, the audio, and the visual engagement to truly create a memorable battle scene.

I've played both for years (own most of the HL catelog too) and while HL is greater known amongst the FPS fanbase, it truly can't hold a candle to the first two FEAR games.

The greatest disappointment after the two add ons was FEAR 3 was mega sh*tballs bad.

Imagine watching your favorite FPS platform go from a AAA status to the $9.99 bargain bin at Electronic Boutique. Similar to what happened with SOF from Raven with the failed sequel " Soldier of Fortune: Payback"

[Zorgl]

F.E.A.R., best corridor FPS ever. The only game where IA is, sometimes, as good as Fear is the one from Rage, and it was made 7 years after. And the gunfights from HL2 are quiet boring, the combine soldiers don't flank you, can't run more than 10 meters (sometimes don't even moove a muscle after being hit), don't take cover to surprise you (I still like the game anyway).

[Viperr101]

both of you just gave me ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ dyslexia. thanks.

[Alopekis]

Yes. The AI from 12 years ago is not as good as the AI from modern games. The graphics in pong also don't stand up to the graphics in Battlefield 1.

[robotbob]

Originally posted by Viperr101:

This is my point. The game may have been good for the time, but even then it's still not great. So why the ♥♥♥♥ are people still acting like this ♥♥♥♥ is good in 2017? This was posted 2 ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ days ago for christs sake https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2017/04/03/why-fears-ai-is-still-the-best-in-first-person-shooters/

(I feel like I'm writing a biblical text)
In the begining we had ReaperBot for Quake. it was our first look at an AI that may be a real challenge for a player. We all went nuts looking at the .qc code. Quake 2's debut blew out mind, the AI ducked our shot, amazing.

Next came Unreal, they hired Steve (reaperbot guy) and he moved his AI work into Unreal. Then
Q3. Nothing significant I can recall came after that AI wise, that wasn't just a clone of either IDs or Epics work, until Fear. Being flanked alone was mind blowing. But there was little before it.

[Headless]

HL2's enemies hardly had AI. They mostly moved on set paths hard-coded in by the developers. When they were left to their own devices, they mostly stood there or moved slightly to one side.

Most modern shooters operate in a similar way. Enemies hide behind chest-high walls, poking their heads out and waiting to be shot. If you can point out another shooter whose singleplayer campaign has better AI than FEAR, I'd be impressed.

[Cobra Commander]

The main thing is that enemies flank more often than rush, which goes against the AI logic of 99% of all other games.

The "squad AI" seems hit or miss to me as well, but it is definitely different every time. It was primarily how well flushed out their tactics were that drew attention. Grenade attacks to flush the player out of cover and coordinated flanking marked the Replica army's behavior, and like everybody keeps saying and will keep saying, they are different every time except for one or two cases where they are not aware of the player coming in or where you can bottleneck them.

The AI is improved in the expansion packs where they will wait for the player more often than rushing or flanking, which makes them difficult to assault.

I guess it wasn't so much the magnitude of their challenge that made them talked about, but you got a good sense of attacking, reading, and counteracting your opponent like wasn't there with the Combine in HL2, the gold standard of "idiot enemy footsoldier" or like the same way wasn't there in like Hard Reset where you've got the same idea of angry robots stomping straight at you shooting and making noise. The Replica actually look like squads in their tactics, where other games give you kind of an animal that just bum-rushes you shooting or swinging a baseball bat.

The RPS article has a .gif that explains it at the individual level -- shifting behind cover and opening fire, and then shows the squad intelligence in action pinning the player behind cover and hitting him from another angle.

[Jay]

I have never touched the FEAR series until today ... ( just one of those series that got ignored due to other games taking my interest )

Ive been playing computer games since the days of commodore 46 / amiga 500 and i will say this much about the AI ... I have seen a hell of alot worse through the years.

[Cobra Commander]

Originally posted by Headless:

If you can point out another shooter whose singleplayer campaign has better AI than FEAR, I'd be impressed.

I honestly think RAGE is a good contender, by merit of the variety of AI behaviors showcased between enemy types. Think like how the Wasted clan acts different from the Gearheads who act different from the Jackals who act different from the Authority.

[jgk95]

Originally posted by edocnoen.v1.0:

I have never touched the FEAR series until today ... ( just one of those series that got ignored due to other games taking my interest )

Ive been playing computer games since the days of commodore 46 / amiga 500 and i will say this much about the AI ... I have seen a hell of alot worse through the years.

You will truly enjoy the game. I think the game is an oldie but a goodie with replayability.

And yes, I still have my Commodore 64 in a closet somewhere too. :)

[robotbob]

I really think the AIs pathing reverses the priorty normally done in games. So normally its just shortests path to player. (Rush). But the AI takes the longest path to player (corridor play, with pre designed longest paths) It then looks like well planned flanking but just a path preference.
Add ducking, leaning, throwing grenades at a position where they last saw the player, and so on. Gives a reasonable feeling of planning by the AI, but its really just those simple conditions.

[Cobra Commander]

Originally posted by robotbob:

I really think the AIs pathing reverses the priorty normally done in games. So normally its just shortests path to player. (Rush). But the AI takes the longest path to player (corridor play, with pre designed longest paths) It then looks like well planned flanking but just a path preference.
Add ducking, leaning, throwing grenades at a position where they last saw the player, and so on. Gives a reasonable feeling of planning by the AI, but its really just those simple conditions.

i happened to watch the dev logs as the game was being released and it's sort of like that, really. there's pre-set "hints" in the environment (jump through this window, tip this box, flip this table) that the AI refers to once it targets the player. AI pathing is all on the fly. The logs are in the game files. in order to use a pre-set flanking strike, the player movement would have to pre-set as well. it's given initial blocking positions and patrols in some cases or will idly clear a zone but, for example, it won't have a pre-attained concept of the surrounding area except in special pieces.