F.E.A.R is a very overrated video game trilogy

So I decided to play through 1 and 2 cause Greg Russo who wrote the Mortal Kombat movie reboot is writing the movie adaption of it and he thinks it’s one of the best FPS’s out there. I’m not sure what he and everyone else saw, but it’s nothing really too special.

I mean sure I could see how this was something when it first came out, but today it’s pretty standard. I don’t even think they are as scary as people claimed them to be. Heck they feel WAY more like action games with horror elements in them. The whole time I was thinking “I’m supposed to be scared by this?”. There was a lot more they could have done with the horror for a game called FEAR (I KNOW it’s F.E.A.R). 
 

2nd was just as disappointing. It started out ok, but I finished it in like a few hours and that really felt more like an action game. Also I felt like the 2nd game was supposed to be a squad game at some point cause it felt like at certain points you were supposed to give your partner commands, but they must have dropped it cause it wouldn’t feel as scary. Also was very shocked how short it was and the ending was just as underwhelming as the first.

I don’t even know if I really wanna play the 3rd considering how much I heard how people disliked it.

If Greg really thinks F.E.A.R is one of the best FPS’s out there, he needs to play more video games.

I feel like this should've been a tweet or a blog post or something because dropping this on a discussion forum feels counter-intuitive. What are any of us supposed to say about this. "This game is stinky and I don't like it." Okay? Cool story, bro. You don't really leave anything open to talk about here.

I’m open to hear other people’s opinion about this. It’s just I didn’t care for it, but would love to hear why anyone may have liked it or disliked it. Again I never said the game was bad, I just don’t think it’s as great as people made it out to be.

The AI in the first one was really good and the bullet time was also pretty fun.

First F.E.A.R. is definitely one of the very best video games. No one will change my opinion ever.

I will have to play through 2 and 3 too.

Yes and no, I would say.

The first F.E.A.R. is very repetitive and visually dull, the plot is frustrating (you are conveniently always too late and your actual contribution to the plot is so small that you might as well have not bothered) and the game's structure gets predictable fast. The two expansions try their best to vary the experience a bit, but they are for the most part worse-looking, very forgettable and not very fun to play. The gameplay itself, the music and the lore are nice, though, and both Alma and Paxton Fettel are memorable characters.

F.E.A.R. 2 overall is a substantial improvement over its predecessor in almost every way; however, the FOV is too narrow as a result of this being a multiplatform release, the cover flipping mechanic is useless, the game is a bit too colorful at times (i.e. the enemy combatants and the weapons are fitted with unnecessary neon parts) and the ending is controversial, to say the least.

[Content warning for sexual violence]

I actually really enjoyed F.E.A.R. 3, even though it doubles down on F.E.A.R. 2's cartoon aesthetics, its level design clumsy at times, its plot kind of eh and its ending a bit abrupt. However, I was not bored for a second and playing as Paxton Fettel is surprisingly fun. Too bad, the coop and multiplayer are most likely completely deserted now.

2 hours ago, NoXion said:

 

One could say the same thing about Doom.

B...bbbbut....but rip and tear!

I misread this as an underrated game trilogy lol.

I think it's quite the contrary - from what I've seen, FEAR 2 and 3 weren't as well regarded as the first game.

Trilogy - not sure, but the first game is lovely, absolutely top notch. Could be repetitive, but still memorable in every aspect, especially the sound design. I loved it.
Today's standards aren't relevant at all at this point.

9 minutes ago, TheNoob_Gamer said:

I think it's quite the contrary - from what I've seen, FEAR 2 and 3 weren't as well regarded as the first game.

Yeah, really. There's no love lost for them as most fans, including myself, found F.E.A.R. 2 to be a pretty underwhelming follow-up that only marginally improved in some respects, but nerfed others. Meanwhile, the general consensus with F.E.A.R. 3 is it's utter shite as it tried too hard to be a Call of Duty clone and forgot what series it was in. But I'm with Clumsy regarding F.E.A.R. 1. It's a fucking great game that makes you feel like you're in a John Woo film with challenging AI, thrilling combat and has one of the best shotguns to ever grace the genre.

Certainly, the most impressive detail about F.E.A.R. 1 was, and still is, its enemy AI. Awesome gunfights, ambushes, enemy teamwork.

Unfortunately, F.E.A.R. 2 faced some rough decisions during its development. Originally, it was planned to create two different versions of the game, one for the XBOX platform and a technically/graphically more advanced version for the PC. Rather late during development, the team was forced by the publisher to scrap the PC version and use the XBOX codebase for both platforms. So we will never get to see what F.E.A.R. 2 for PC really could have been.

F.E.A.R. 3 was created by a different game developer, though. And they consulted John Carpenter (horror film director, e.g. 'The Fog') to improve on the horror aspect of the game, with mixed results. If you like the F.E.A.R. franchise, the third installment is well worth being played.

2 hours ago, Spooner5020 said:

I don’t even think they are as scary as people claimed them to be.

I think F.E.A.R can be considered more of an action horror game. Apart from a few sections and scripted Alma/Vettel encounters, the game focuses more on the fantastic combat and advanced A.I. I still think the A.I is unmatched, compared to some modern games. Fight me on that one. Oh, and the Shotgun... Is one of the greatest Shotguns to grace the FPS genre.

I've heard the sequel/prequel thing was divisive, to say the least, but F.3.E.R ( I'd love to know what genius decided on that name, since it sounds like you're saying F three er, destroying the meaning of the acronym) is a totally different story. it feels so detached from everything in the series ( though to be fair, F.E.A.R 2 was detached as well) and just looks way too much like call of duty for my liking.

Honestly, the most terrifying thing in F.E.A.R is when a replicant yells "flashlight" and start to form up. You KNOW you're in for a fight.

(Sorry for the rambly post)

13 minutes ago, Silent Wolf said:

Honestly, the most terrifying thing in F.E.A.R is when a replicant yells "flashlight" and start to form up. You KNOW you're in for a fight.

This reminds me: the original F.E.A.R. is one of those games where the flashlight battery inexplicably only lasts a couple minutes before having to shut down and recharge. It is not quite as bad as Half-Life 2 - your flashlight battery is thankfully not linked to your stamina - but it is so annoying, especially given your status as a super-soldier working for the federal government.

Also, I recommend playing F.E.A.R. 1 with a mod that makes the Replica troopers silent to make the experience more tense as well as a bit less predictable: since they are mindless clones being telepathically controlled by a psychic commander, it makes no sense for them to give away their position by yelling and audibly coordinating each other.

Like deus-ex said. It's not about the horror, FEAR's regular horror kind of sucks ass and doesn't matter. Silent Wolf is also right, hearing their dialogue is the real horror.

27 minutes ago, Silent Wolf said:

I still think the A.I is unmatched, compared to some modern games. Fight me on that one.

I remember back then reading an interview where the developers themselves explained that the AI is actually not that advanced and what creates the illusion of intelligence is the level design that allows the enemy multiple courses of action. However, if you drop enemies in a poorly-designed arena or even a linear corridor, their AI immediately becomes much less impressive. I know from experimentation that the AI can be easily cheesed by a veteran player. Also, the stealth troopers are easy to dispatch, given their fairly basic AI: most of the time, they will just rush at you and you can even spot them from afar if you are paying attention. 

I played the original a bit recently, well, the combat is pretty good, but kind of too one note really, it all blurs after a while. Doesn't help that it has the most mundane settings possible. It's barely a horror game on any level, but I don't think they tried to be really. 

I mean, I played through these three games and I got some enjoyment from them, but on the subject of overrated, it's not just these games, the entire period of FPS design was very very blaaaaggghhhh, whether it's Half Life or Halo or CoD or whatever. I've done enough arguments over that to say I'm not interested in them anymore, but those are my feelings, the entire genre didn't really become worthwhile to me again until Dusk entered early access. 

2 minutes ago, Rudolph said:

I remember back then reading an interview from the developers themselves explaining that the AI is actually not that advanced and what creates the illusion of intelligence is the level design that allows the enemy multiple courses of action.

Another win for stellar level design!

4 hours ago, Spooner5020 said:

The whole time I was thinking “I’m supposed to be scared by this?”

i dont know anybody who loves F.E.A.R. for the horror lol. everyone i know (including myself) who loves the first game, loves it for its fun shooting, cool guns, awesome particle effects, and spooky atmosphere.

2 and 3 tho, nobody is claiming those are good whatsoever lol

Kind of echoing off of what hybridial said above.  I remember trying the demo when it came out and thought it was pretty cool - decentish graphics for the time, the constantly chattering AI that sometimes could be challenging to deal with, and the ability to slow time on command when needed.  Full release dropped and I bought it.  It started out feeling great, and then it just sort of started getting monotonous.  But during that time of FPS genre, the whole list of offerings had that same feeling.  The only one I even bothered to finish from that era of FPS games was Halo 3.

Then I tried out FEAR 2 after having forgotten the lesson learned and man, an ok start and then it just became the same boring cover shooter / bullet time hell again.  And then FEAR 3 also somehow ended up in my library and good lord what a mess.

FEAR is a curiosity for those wanting to experience it, but I have to say it was not my cup of tea at all.

54 minutes ago, kaleb. said:

2 and 3 tho, nobody is claiming those are good whatsoever lol

I am (even though they have their flaws). :D

9 minutes ago, Rudolph said:

I am (even though they have their flaws). :D

well i dont hate 2, but 3 i really dont remember liking much of anything about it at all

I always thought FEAR 2 was far better than the first, though I enjoyed the AI of the first game a little more. But the repetition and the first game's love affair with meatshield monsters really wore thin, where the second game felt pretty evenly paced throughout with more area variety and monsters that didn't rely on health pools for difficulty. The story was more engaging as well, and the gore felt a little more brutal and less cartoony, which enhanced the atmosphere, imo.

F3AR isn't fooling anyone, but I love what there is to love. The story is fun, even if it feels a little disconnected/rushed, the coop was a cool idea that didn't wear out its welcome too fast, the artstyle was gorgeous, and I actually did like the cover system. It really should have slowed itself down and focused on the methodical approach the first two games emphasized though, because it didn't have alot of replay value. I'd take the first two games any day over the third, though it might beat some of the expansion packs.

FEAR 1 and it's expansions are pretty fun. Didn't like 2 or 3 much. FEAR 1 for me completely replaced Doom 3 for when I want to play a horror shooter with actually engaging combat and good spooks.

Some expected responses.

Although i have the entire trilogy, Fear 1 and 2 strike me most. The former remains a pillar of brilliance for yes, its AI (Which is just a gigantic hack relying on level design), but first and formost for having the most satisfying shotgun ever in a video game. Yes, it even outbeats Doom's.

FEAR's Shotty is the ultimate giving zero fucks weapon and for that alone it will always remain relevant.

6 hours ago, Spooner5020 said:

So I decided to play through 1 and 2 cause Greg Russo who wrote the Mortal Kombat movie reboot is writing the movie adaption of it and he thinks it’s one of the best FPS’s out there. I’m not sure what he and everyone else saw, but it’s nothing really too special.

 

I mean sure I could see how this was something when it first came out, but today it’s pretty standard. I don’t even think they are as scary as people claimed them to be. Heck they feel WAY more like action games with horror elements in them. The whole time I was thinking “I’m supposed to be scared by this?”. There was a lot more they could have done with the horror for a game called FEAR (I KNOW it’s F.E.A.R). 

If they are so standard, then why are there still games coming out that revolve around the concept of breaking into a room and slowmo killing things in sight (Rico/Rico London)? Simple: The concept works. Greg has a point here - FEAR's visual design might be bland, but its the sum of its parts that makes it shine through. Broken down by its individual limbs, and it will fall flat.

And i don't think that was ever Fear's intent anyway.

6 hours ago, Spooner5020 said:

If Greg really thinks F.E.A.R is one of the best FPS’s out there, he needs to play more video games.

Okay, what do you think are some of the best FPS's out there?

The first F.E.A.R. game is absolutely one of my favourite shooters. F.E.A.R. 2 is OK. Every other entry in the series kind of sucks.

I loved the original when it came out! The back and forth between suspense/horror and action was a lot of fun, even if it was immediately apparent which you were currently walking into. The enemy soldier AI was nothing short of amazing; hearing them shout orders based on what you were doing just added so much to the shooting sequences. The sequels... Not as good.

You may not like FEAR, that's ok, I however adore the first FEAR and the expansions so I'm just gonna gush about them.

FEAR is, without any doubt in my mind, a purely cinematic game.

I don't mean this in terms of the story or that it is a glorified mp4 file, I mean that every fight and battle is a sight to behold.

FEAR has every gunfight absolutely caked in flare and glory, they are loud, they are fast, impactful and they look brilliant. In the heat of battle, men yell orders or screams, meaty weapons pound in all directions and debris impacts with a crunch thus creating a beautiful symphony of destruction. Every gunfight is laden with sparks, flying bodies and gore and the very walls themselves tear apart in gunfire, muzzle flashes erupt from the surroundings and the bullets trace to their target making every fight an easy to read spectacle.

And the gameplay, oh the gameplay is amazing.

It's like I'm watching an action film, I'm the camera, the actor and the director, as you play through complex and amazing scenes quite simply play out before you, never is there a dull moment as you blast someone away with the world's meatiest shotgun then roundhouse kick the next goon out a window and splatter the next with a well placed grenade, all this occurs (or doesn't) naturally as ultimately the player is the one doing this, not a cutscene, YOU are the badass mf.

Never played anything like it, probably never will play anything that tops it.

Monolith ditching all of the already mature technology, mechanics, sound design and game feel that made FEAR so excellent when making the sequels honestly ranks in my mind as one of the most idiotic game direction decisions of all time. They could have simply upgraded the engine and worked on perfecting the formula they already had, but they took every wrong lesson possible from the state of the shooter industry of the time instead. It's like watching someone storm away from their table at a Michelin star restaurant and start eating sandwich crusts out of a nearby dumpster instead.

no you're wrong it's brilliant... the problem with the game is it take a lot of skill to be able to enjoy it correctly.... so if you haven't got the motor skills you just won't get it

it's even worse on the console, you have to be in an even smaller skill subset

and that's why they redesigned it to be crap for FEAR2+