F.e.a.r.

Discussion in 'PC Gaming' started by Varg Vikernes, Nov 22, 2005.

  1. Blade

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,168
    Likes Received:
    3
    Diplo: Hehe, your list of FPS cliches is hilarious.

    So I guess F.E.A.R. doesn't have any sequences with a gun-toting sidekick that apparently only you can kill, eh? Well, you can't fit every cliche in..
     
  2. Bumpyride

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    May 19, 2005
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    MS, USA
    Spoiler alert:

    I just finished the game last night, and I thought the story made quite a bit of sense in the end. I was wondering all along why Fettel didn't seem to be trying too hard to kill you. At the start, he knocks you out and then just walks away. The soldiers you face are always in small groups; they call for reinforcements and they never come. The little girl can apparently vaporize people at will, but never attacks you in a way that you can't escape. The whole time I just felt like I was being baited and lead somewhere, and that's the way it turns out. They wanted to lead you to her. I wasn't sure why Fettel wanted you to shoot him; maybe he felt like he didn't deserve to live either.

    Also, I felt like the ghosts at the end that you had to shoot was Alma's way of leading you out of the facility. By my interpretation, the very last vision (aside from the helicopter thing) made it clear that she didn't wish you any harm, and simply wanted to destroy the whole project and everyone involved.

    end spoilers

    My only real problem with the game, and a lot of reviews said this, was the way it drags in the middle. There's very little story happening, and you're just going from office to office killing whatever moves. It reminded me of alpha labs in doom3.

    That's my $0.02 anyway.
     
  3. N00b

    Regular

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Messages:
    698
    Likes Received:
    114
    I was a bit disappointed, too. I think the SP demo is much better than the actual game. If the whole game had the density and atmosphere of the demo, this would have been one hell of a game.
     
  4. kyleb

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,165
    Likes Received:
    52
    Thanks Bumpyride, I was about to type out a post to say exactly that.
     
  5. swaaye

    swaaye Entirely Suboptimal
    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,045
    Likes Received:
    1,119
    Location:
    WI, USA
    Yeah I was disappointed with Quake 4 and FEAR, as well.

    Both are derivate shovelware IMO, with each having loads of has-been gameplay ideas coupled with somewhat fancy graphics. Q4 runs far better than FEAR though, and even looks better I think. Q4 also has a superior gameplay feel I believe. Neither, however, held my interest for more than about half the game and I've stopped playing them entirely now.

    Q4 just doesn't have anything going for it other than its optimized engine and gameplay feel. It's so disgustingly linear. The vehicles are awful. Enemies stupid. Guns unoriginal. MP a has-been.

    FEAR is a tease. It seems to have serious promise at the start but it just sorta goes stale. It has the least interesting enviros I think I've every played through. Nothing new here. Not particularly scary most of the time, but more like annoyingly cliche-spooky. Slow-mo is cool (a good copy of Max Payne) and some of the baddies are nifty. The game just doesn't seem to have a solid plan of attack on the storyline front; it's more like jumping thru hoops to get from point-A to point-B. Yay.

    I suppose my problem is that I'm a lot older now than I was when I was really into FPS games. The development houses are really starting to bore me with these constant rehashes of tired gameplay. I just can't be bothered to be continually excited about gameplay that I've spent over a decade playing.
     
    #25 swaaye, Dec 6, 2005
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 6, 2005
  6. John Reynolds

    John Reynolds Ecce homo
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    4,491
    Likes Received:
    267
    Location:
    Westeros
    Against my own better judgement, I'm really enjoying Quake 4. Of course it was practically free, so I can't grumble about paying $50-60 for something so uninspired, but it's pretty, mindless (the way I enjoy my shooters), and fun.
     
  7. jb

    jb
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,636
    Likes Received:
    7
    I finally finnished FEAR the other night. I had finnished Q4 a few weeks earlier.

    I thought they both had thier strong/week points.

    For Q4 I liked the feel at you were part of the Marines there to do a job. Even though you were by your self most of the time. Made it seem more believe-able. The varity was nice but they had the hole planet to work with. The weapons were ok... I thought the RailGun and the BFG of Q2 had a bigger punch to them. The action was there and they mixed it up with different types of Monsters. Basically very little thought was needed to play and enjoy this game. Which is a good thing :) In all Q4 was a pretty decent game and would have been shinning brighter so many other games came out at the same time (ie fear).

    I liked FEAR better. Not sure why. It was very limited in its enviroments but the story was taking place in just a few parts of a city (thus they did not have room to explore). And yes the enimes were a bit limted, but not sure what else you could have fought that fits the storyline...maybe more killer robots as Armcharm was a defense contractor.. And even though most of the ideas had been done before. They all worked well. Yes max payne had bullet time, but in FEAR it just felt "better"? Maybe it was all the visuals that went along with it..I remember the first time in slow mo I hit a guy with a nade and the glass in the offices next to him all blew out in slow mo...very very cool. I did not get into the story at first but at the end I was enjoying it. That vault level was freaky! I think what really set it apart was that in Q4 I never really had to worry or think about how I wanted to take out the enemy. In FEAR I had to replay many parts many times because every time I planed an method of attack the clones had me beet. I think that is what pushed it over the top for me the fact that I actually felt I had to be careful and think before each encounter and not run in blazing :)
     
    #27 jb, Dec 7, 2005
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2005
  8. Amit

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2005
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is my first post on this forum.I do hope you people can help me in this regards
    1)The settings for my system(Ti 4200) does not show the weapon in the first person mode.What could be the possibe reason.
    2)The engine seems to be rendering ONLY straight lines.Still it seems to be a system hog.Is the engine unoptimised or are there any effects that demand such outrageous system/gfx requirement?(just to point out---> HL-2 and FC runs smooth on my system and the gfx look phenomenal,Everything maxed out at 800*600)
    Thanks.
     
  9. memberSince97

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    May 26, 2004
    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Palm Springs Area
    Did you set it to run DX8 shaders and possibly , do you have DX9c installed ?
     
  10. Amit

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2005
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have DX 9c installed and I have tried DX 8 shaders on/off.but there seems to be no change.In fact I experienced the exact same problem even with the Demo.
     
  11. Pete

    Pete Moderate Nuisance
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    5,777
    Likes Received:
    1,814
    1) Could it be that FEAR doesn't draw the weapon for very old/slow systems? I know it generally boosts framerates in other FPSs.

    2) FEAR may not be as efficiently coded as other games (ATM), or it's just got more stuff going on than it lets on. ;)
     
  12. Amit

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2005
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well I have a P4 2.4,512 DDR and Ti4200(128 MB).I know its not the latest but is it SLOW?
     
  13. trinibwoy

    trinibwoy Meh
    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2004
    Messages:
    12,059
    Likes Received:
    3,119
    Location:
    New York
    Sorry but yes, that setup is very slow.
     
  14. Cartoon Corpse

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2004
    Messages:
    2,216
    Likes Received:
    22
    i had a problem with a game (can't remember which one) where no HUD info displayed (lower or upper) when i was at 1200x1600. at 1024x768 it was displayed. could it be something odd like that? the weapon bottom would be at the edge of the screen. the game allowed the settings, i think my desktop was matched to it (maybe not...it was a while ago).
     
  15. Crusher

    Crusher Aptitudinal Constituent
    Regular

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2002
    Messages:
    869
    Likes Received:
    19
    My guess would be that either the resolution or refresh rate was not the same as your dekstop, and the monitor just wasn't sized properly for the resolution/refresh rate setting the game was at (so the top and bottom of the image were off the viewable area of the screen).
     
  16. KimB

    Legend

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Messages:
    12,928
    Likes Received:
    230
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Just got this game a few days ago, and beat it earlier today. I'd say it's pretty good. It really slows down with rather repetitive action around the middle, but picks up near the end. Some of the cutscenes are very cool (I especially liked riding in the helicopter).

    But wow is it a resource hog. With my GeForce 7800 GT SLI setup, I was only able to run at 1024x768 with 4x AA and 16-degree anistropic filtering if all settings were set to maximum (1280x960 could be called playable, but there were some annoying slowdowns in places). I probably could get higher with some tweaking, but I just wanted to play the game. And I didn't mind the low resolution so much for this particular game.

    On another note, this game appears to use very roughly ~20% of the second CPU in my dual-core setup.
     
  17. Scott_Arm

    Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2004
    Messages:
    15,134
    Likes Received:
    7,680
    I haven't been really impressed with FEAR. Once I got over the cool effects during gun fights, the game got really boring for me. I think it's the style I play FPS games. I take the, "Lure them around a corner and mow them down" approach, which seems to work flawlessly in this game.
     
  18. KimB

    Legend

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Messages:
    12,928
    Likes Received:
    230
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Well, I found it pretty boring during the center myself. Did you go back and finish the game?
     
  19. Scott_Arm

    Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2004
    Messages:
    15,134
    Likes Received:
    7,680
    Not yet. I plan on finishing it eventually. Maybe I'll do it over the CHristmas holidays. I also have Fable and Call of Duty 2 to finish.
     
  20. KimB

    Legend

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Messages:
    12,928
    Likes Received:
    230
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Yeah, I think you've hit the doldrum middle of the game. I doubt it has to do with your playstyle, I got quite bored with it myself. You may notice a couple of other posts in this thread where people have stated the same thing.
     

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...