User Score
5.8

Mixed or average reviews- based on 319 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 94 out of 319

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jun 22, 2011
    4
    I love the FEAR franchise. I loved the action horror, and I especially loved FEAR 2. It is a sad time for the FEAR franchise as this is just another poorly ported console game. Graphics are not up to par with FEAR 2, why are we regressing? FEAR 2 flowed so organically, and I could not stop playing until I beat it. In this installment, we the PC gamers are left with an overly difficult jerky controlled game which design seems to be based around a buggy, unwanted and unnecessary cover system which leaves you looking at the poor wall texture as you wait for your health to regenerate (which is all the damn time). FEAR 2 had health packs, and it was brilliant... you the player were in control of your fate. Why, Monolith, have you forsaken your true core audience? A truly sad ending to a great series. I wont get to know what happens in the story, because this game is too frustrating to look at, and ultimately play. Expand
  2. Jun 21, 2011
    10
    I have played FEAR 3 on the PC and Xbox and this game is the best game so far this summer!... Co-op Campaign, Playing as Fettel is unique and pretty sweet (you can possess enemies!), one of the best FPS cover systems period, extremely cool scoring system, and some really unique & fun Co-op Multiplayer Modes... AND because of the Scoring System and Co-op/Multiplayer the replay-ability of FEAR 3 is through the roof!!!... NOTE:This is NOT Call Of Duty nor is it trying to be COD (which I think is refreshing)... Expand
  3. Jul 13, 2011
    6
    Unlike FEAR 1 and 2 there is no Medpacks or Armor in this one, so now we get the baby's first blinking red screen version of FPS health. It really ruined the gameplay and the fear aspect of the game knowing that you could just regen your health by cowering in a corner for a bit. Never felt "scared" in this game once because of it. If you enjoyed the story of the first 2 and want to see how it "ends", then play this one. If not, honestly just play FEAR 1 and 2 again they were much better. Expand
  4. Jul 31, 2011
    3
    What a shame for such a once great franchise to fall so badly into mediocrity. The PC version is like stepping back in time to 1997 when all FPS games were played on the keyboard, that is the amount of control you feel you have while playing with a mouse and keyboard. This crappy console port not only plays badly, it looks worse than the original, has a tacked on cover system that was not needed or wanted and just like every other FPS console game has regenerative health system which i'm now sure the only point of is that it lengthens the playtime because you are stuck behind a crate for 60% of the game. Played for a few hours, uninstalled and reflected how good the original game was and what a pile of crap this was. Once again, bad or lazy development has killed this game and possibly the franchise for me. Such a shame. Expand
  5. Jun 22, 2011
    8
    FEAR 3 is a solid 8.5, though half-numbers cannot be chosen on the slider, so I chose "8" as the game's score. With the exception of the FOV (which needs to be better for the PC version) and some low res textures, FEAR 3 still looks great maxed-out, and even more impressively, is a seriously fun game. It's a mix between the best of the FEAR series (though a little lower on the visuals scale), and though not quite as "dark" and horrifying in atmosphere as the first in the series, it's definitely atmospheric. FEAR 3 brings together action with atmosphere, incredible lighting (and I don't just mean effects, I mean coloration and mood), an excellent (and extremely fun and intuitive) movement and cover system, excellent sound and ambient effects, excellent gun play in both feel and sound, and astounding A.I. that really plays extremely smart. They'll take cover in a very natural manner, while moving around the environment, flanking in various ways from various positions, call out to one another as to exactly where you are, and use their weapons efficiently. FEAR 3 is not just "run and gun", in the sense that, you will need everything at your disposal in order to survive. You're not loaded with tons of ammo and will run out at times, needing to take cover, use melee and grab a fallen enemy's weapon to resupply. The pacing is great, though there are no quick saves, which isn't a huge deal, as while the game offers a challenge, it's reasonable if you're smart and quick. I was so engrossed in the game, I played it straight through to the end in one sitting, at if you don't rush (in most parts you cant anyway) it's just over five hours, maybe close to six. Though a little short, the option to play through again as Fettle is brilliant, and even more fun than going through as the main protagonist. There is something incredibly addictive about using Fettle's powers, and it's an absolute blast, offering a lot more variety to the gameplay due to his powers. I thoroughly enjoyed the first playthrough a lot, but only thirty minutes in while playing as Fettle, and I'm having twice the fun already. While A.I. modeling could be a bit better, it's not bad, and there's still dismemberment depending on where the enemy takes damage, to which they react (grabbing their should at a blown-off arm, limping with a blasted leg) and the gore is prominent in the game. While it might not have quite the visuals of the rest of the series, it's thoroughly enjoyable and, with Fettle's powers and the co-op/multiplayer (which I haven't even gotten to yet), is far more creative and a blast to play. I only wish is were a bit longer and the FOV was adjustable, but maxed-out at 1920x1200 it runs beautifully and looks far better than the console footage and screenshots would have you believe. If you're looking for a truly fun shooter with fun mechanics, I'd definitely recommend grabbing FEAR 3. The only technical issues I've had were one random lock-up/crash, and twice, the game windowed itself and it was a little annoying trying to get it un-windowed, but that's it for technical issues. Recommended! Expand
  6. Nov 1, 2012
    3
    Hey, I just met you and this is crazy but F.E.A.R 3 is a terrible **** game and never ever buy it maybe seriously, never. The franchise has been ruined to the point where the combination of action and horror elements is clearly dysfunctional. I started the game, having enjoyed the first title many, many years ago and never having played the sequel, curious to see how the title has evolved throughout the years. I was disturbed, not by the same fake ghosts that pop out each corner in FEAR 3, but by how badly of a job WB or whatever since Vivendi studios do not take part in the production of the games anymore, have done in the third installment. I remember when playing the first game, the atmosphere had this genuinely unique and creepy vibe to it. FEAR 3 dumbed it all down to a mindless CoD clone, with the cheaper jump scares than ever, but this time done so awkwardly its not scary, but more cringey.

    gameplay - 6
    visuals - 7
    story - 1
    Expand
  7. Jun 21, 2011
    10
    Absolutely the best in the Fear series. This is the Fear that I have been waiting for since the inception of the series. The A.I. of the enemy troops is brilliant. They flank, flush out with grenades, and work to put you in the most tactical mindset I have ever seen in a game. The weapons and controls (XBox 360 controller) are the best I have played so far in a PC FPS game. Everything feels perfect, the fighting, the atmosphere, and the A.I. "GET THIS GAME!!!" It is flawless. Expand
  8. Jun 23, 2011
    2
    Another worthless console shooter identical to every other title. Cover system, 2-weapon limit and health regeneration. Tired of picking up games and realizing it plays like an expansion to any other console-port shooter. Remember when different games were actually different? I do.
  9. Jun 26, 2011
    3
    Don't waste your time. Better games than this with better stories and better gameplay were released 10 years ago. There's no atmosphere here, no interesting characters, no interesting gameplay. It's like ordering a pizza in 1999, getting it delivered in 2001, and eating it in 2011. You can probably swallow it down somehow and trudge through, but I can't promise you won't regret it. They likely took the old engine, through together some levels in a few minutes, and made the textures blurry to make it look 'better.' Go play the original (again, if need be), but don't support this garbage. Expand
  10. Jun 13, 2012
    2
    This game gets a 2, because that's the level I got to before I fell asleep playing on the fearless difficulty. The game is so mindnumbingly bland that I can't even think about it without getting drowsy again.
  11. Jun 23, 2011
    4
    The PC version of FEAR3 is an abortion. Low resolution textures and a sickening field of view that can't be changed immediately stand out. Aside from that, there are hitmarkers in single player - someone should be fired. This is a COD clone through and through, devoid of anything that made the first game a classic. The idea of horror in this game is a can falling over...or someone throwing a cup out of a cell peep hole.

    The only positive I can pull out of thin air is that overall, the graphics are very good. The atmosphere is nice and thick despite the textures breaking immersion and the fact that windows are not transparent, they appear to be self illuminated in most instances.

    Someone figured out that the game runs at 30fps, and each frame is shown twice to give the false effect of 60fps. Unacceptable. Might as well have stabbed myself in the face and let Warner Brothers urinate in the wound.

    Forget that this is FEAR, forget any idea of horror, forget immersion...actually just forget the entire game. Go play COD instead. That's all this is.
    Expand
  12. May 30, 2012
    9
    It's a shame that F.E.A.R. 3 will always be remembered as an un-scary horror game, rather then as a stellar and clever shooter. As a counterpart to real horror like Amnesia or System Shock 2, F.E.A.R. 3 manages to fail spectacularly. The earlier F.E.A.R.'s may have added some glaringly non-scary mechanics in favor of the shooting, but at least they added a splashing of truly creepy moments. The 3rd installment doesn't manage even that. But if you toss out the horror label, you're left with a ambitious shooter with some interesting horror trappings, some re-playability, interesting tactics, a dash of Silent Hill-esque metaphorical monsters, and that rare sort of secondary multiplayer component that tries to break the mold and do something new. F.E.A.R. 3 is like opening up a candy bar and getting Bacon: You may feel let down because you wanted candy, but if you get past that, it's still damn tasty. Expand
  13. Jul 3, 2011
    6
    Not a bad game but wait for the bargain bin and don't pay more than $15 for it. It's a rip-off at the asking price. 8 hours in the campaign and that's playing it slowly and looking at every little dead end.
  14. Jun 23, 2011
    9
    I remember playing CoD: Black Ops and raging every time the game took away control so it could do some awful exposition of the 'story' and 'characters'. I remember playing Front Mission: Evolution and raging every time the game would force me to play in a specific play-style. F.E.A.R 3, or F.3.A.R to annoy the grammatically correct snobs, is one of the most enjoyable FPS I have played since the beginning of the year, or since HALO: Reach for that matter. I am a big fan of single-player FPS that can draw me in whether because of the story, level-design, set pieces, and the little tidbits that do not involve a forced turret section. And man did F3 not disappoint.

    For starters, I don't believe that a game where your character is equipped to fight WW3, can be scary. To be truly scary, your character need to feel weak in the face of danger. From F.E.A.R to F.E.A.R 3, I don't think there was any real danger to your character. For people who paid attention to the story, ALMA never tried to hurt the pointman, because he was her son. So, it's interesting to see this time around that Alma is not the real threat, but a much more dangerous foe.

    The story aside, the game is a basic cube shooter. Go from one room to the next, fight off wave of enemies, using your slo-mo or uber reflexes to fend them off, navigate a grostesque setting that uses same old tricks to instill fear, though, failing at it the majority of the times. The enemies we face are Armacham's grunts who really are just cannon fodder for the pointman to get rid of in a super soldier's fashion. They get shot in the head, maimed, blown to pieces and what have you. There's nothing special about their AI, but the experience does feel great, from how your weapons handle themselves to the extra tidbits as in, hohoho, ironsight!. But the challenge gets a bumped up when you face off the Ghost soldiers, and the Commanders who have received a few bonuses to make you feel like its a boss fight. And I loved every moment of it.

    As I mentioned, I hate turret sections. Usually used to pad some length into most video games, I felt that F.E.A.R's take on this little extra is much more interesting. Hop into a mech, which can be used during only 3 instances in the entire game, one being optional and providing a bigger challenge on foot, but worthwhile on co-op to increase the length and for sight seeing purposes. The Mech sections in F3 was much more entertaining than the ones in the previous FEAR, and I definitely hope to see DLCs with more mech action. Next, the multiplayer. I used to enjoy a decent amount of MP playtime, but when a game with an amazing SP section has a MP that was added just because everyone is doing the same, it just doesn't feel that great. We have CoD for the TDM/DM frenzies, and CoD has mastered that part beautiful no matter how the haters feel about it. F3's take on the MP, is definitely the main reason to hold on to the game. Get 3 more friends, and fight off wave of enemies, and mechs in F3's take on horde mode. Next, you have soul king, where the PvP takes place. Each player starts off as a voracious soul who wants to possess and consume as many hapless clone's souls as possible. But that's only the start, you can fight each other's off, and murder the ghost of the other players to steal their skulls. Believe me when I say, this mode takes more skill than any DM/TDM focused game.

    Finally, in terms of performance, the game performed wonderfully on my machine. No mouse lag, no random FPS drop. Considering that most games these days are ported, I couldn't say with certitude how it will handle on your rig.

    To conclude, I omited to talk about Fettel's role. Once you beat a mission, you get to replay it as Fettel. And Fettel plays exactly like the Soul Hunter in the MP mode, Soul King. Definitely another layer of FUN in the game.

    So, if you like Single-player FPS, and want extras that cater to your lonewolf's antics, this game is for you.
    Expand
  15. Jun 23, 2011
    3
    An unimaginative, unrewarding grind. Not made by the developers of the first two, but by the people who ported the first one to consoles. And it shows.

    At their best, the first two FEAR games were masterpieces of atmospheric tension ratcheted up through stunning graphics, brutal-but-fluid combat, and immersive level design. At its best, FEAR 3 is a jumbled ball of textbook action and
    horror cliches slathered in super-reflective blood textures and washed-out lighting, hinting at some "scary" story about something or other as it stumbles from one flat, murky combat sequence to the next. This game feels like it was designed by people who had been very briefly told about, but never allowed to play, the first two games, and plays like the various people designing the story, combat mechanics, art, level design, achievements system (so annoying), and "scare sequences" never actually met or even spoke. I guess someone thought they had a really profitable shooter clone on their hands they could churn out for big bucks if they slapped the name FEAR on there. I feel like a chump for having helped prove them right -- and for assuming that the makers of a FEAR game would have wanted to appeal to the people who bought and loved the first two games. Expand
  16. Jul 4, 2011
    5
    A complete trainwreck of a game. Or at least of a F.E.A.R. game, I suppose it qualifies as a not-to-bad shooter, saved from total oblivion by the option to play as Fettel, which is actually quite fun for a while. There might have been a great multiplayer game in there based on design alone ; but the implementation is so completely broken by incompetent programming (basically, the browser and matchmaking are totally kaput) it will already be stone-cold 'dead' by the time you read this.

    So what went so terribly wrong? First up, gameplay. F.E.A.R 3 is so on-rails it makes Crisis 2 look like STALKER. Closed, claustrophobic levels that follow the same pattern of start, kill stuff over and over, hunt for the way out (the one door that you can actually open), rinse and repeat. This is 2001 design, not 2011 design. And it doesn't stop there. On one early level walking exactly-where-you-are-allowed-to-go along ramps in what is supposedly a bombed-out superstore you encounter a bunch of scripted guys looking suitably identical and throwing neverending knives at you; for a minute I thought I was playing Painkiller (only nowhere near as good). Destructable environments? Aside from a few bits of degrading 'cover', you are having a laugh. Interactive environments? What are they. And I can only assume anyone praising enemy 'AI' is having a laugh. Garbage.

    Next, atmosphere. None. Everything from the previous games has been tossed away in favour of kiddie console rubbish that totally destroys it. How are you supposed to have scares when every few seconds you are notified of a new 'achievement' with suitably stupid names, or collecting another Alma doll? I think the idea is to encourage people to play each level more than once in order to get higher scores. If so, that's delusional on huge scale, nobody in their right mind would wish to repeat the experience except in MP. If it worked. Which it doesn't; did I mention that?

    Next, graphics. Poor. Not awful, but just typical multi-platform stuff with no additional loving for the PC. Ridiculous FOV, unless the idea is to make your 16:9 feel like a 4:3. Frame rate limited to 30 fps - why ?? DX11 'features' just create a blurry mess; turn them off before you start. A great franchise ruined. Very, very, sad. All gamers should avoid, at least until they fix the MP. F.E.A.R. fans should avoid totally if it isn't already too late; F.E.A.R 2 (let alone the first one) is pure gaming genius compared with this.
    Expand
  17. Aug 27, 2011
    0
    The original was great. Good clean scares that make you jump. The game play was well done and complex. After that the games have gone down hill. The ending in F.E.A.R. 2 was bad but F.E.A.R. 3 is worse.
  18. op8
    Jun 23, 2011
    8
    i will admit that i like it but it is still inferior to the best in the series which is still the original FEAR!!!!the cover system is unnecassary and i really wish they hadnt made the combat focused around it. the gunplay in the original game was awseome and you only needed lean and crouch even on extreme....and i was also hoping they would have health packs.....oh well :(....... giving it a 8/10 coz i'm such a FEAR head. Expand
  19. Jun 26, 2011
    4
    If you're looking for the same hair-raising horror game driven by an immersive and interesting story that the previous two titles had, best look somewhere else. As an avid fan of the F.E.A.R. series, I was fairly disappointed with this latest installment. Despite boasting that the game had the expertise of John Carpenter and Steve Niles used in development, it remains largely uninteresting, incredibly short, and hardly frightening for a good majority of the game. An obvious console port, F.E.A.R. 3 at its best is another generic shooter placed in a bloody box with paranormal wrapping. Much of the paranormal happenings that were commonplace in the first and second titles are no longer present, and the ones that are there are hardly anything terrifying. The single player campaign suffers the same problem as the majority of FPS title produced these days by being too short, easily forgettable, and un-note worthy as a whole. I do like that Point Man makes a return as main character, with the psychic visage of his brother Fettel acting as a companion of sorts. The level-up based progression system implemented is enjoyable too, though I found myself many times performing differing actions for the sake of gaining experience rather than progressing through as I normally would in a FPS game, which takes away from the immersion some. The cover system, while easy to use, is largely unnecessary

    I bought this game because I thought what I was buying was another F.E.A.R. title. But instead, I got a mediocre, run-of-the-mill FPS game with little in common to its namesake, dressed up and propped up by its multiplayer co-op fanfare that cheapen the feel of what I thought was going to be a great story driven horror title. Good to rent, but not to buy.
    Expand
  20. Jun 29, 2011
    4
    If you play this game it feels like it has been made by people who haven't even seen fear 1 and 2... Fear 2 was already worse than 1 but this... This looks, feels and plays like a $10 budget game. It has no atmosphere, it has no story, it has no tutorial even. It has nothing. It's the biggest waste of money you can ever go for. Avoid it at all costs. Fear 1 had 9-10 from me, Fear 2 had 7-8, this gets 4. Expand
  21. Jul 14, 2011
    4
    Wow how can we play a game that has botched mouse over sensitivity... do they not QA titles any more. First Fear was ground breaking, 2nd was missing its charm and features - @Xanifur agreed this is just money grabbing nonsense.

    -smc
  22. Aug 3, 2011
    4
    This is F.E.A.R. meets Modern Warfare 2 and Mass Effect 2. I was looking forward to a new story line, better graphics, with similar game mechanics. I was not expecting a cover based, health regenerating game. I'm not sure I can even suck it up to finish this one. I may go back to playing the Perseus Mandate for a 3rd time. I can understand wanting to make changes from game to game, but why turn FEAR into a copy of MW2 or ME2? Could they game developers not think of an original concept? this game should be call Modern Warfare: The Alma Project. Expand
  23. Nov 6, 2011
    2
    Complete consolized garbage. A slap in the face to those customers who made the FEAR franchise a success., I hope the development team feels some sort of shame.

    I'm not sure what great lengths one has to go to make the control system of a PC shooter feel unwieldy, but this game as achieved it.

    Textures are terrible.
  24. Mar 12, 2013
    0
    You must be kidding me...What a total waste of time. The A.I. is the most lame I have ever seen the first two games were so good. what were they thinking. I know rip us off for the band names sake that's what they were thinking and the fact you cant save the game were you want is just annoying.
  25. Jun 23, 2011
    3
    A console game, that doesn't translate to a pc game well, it has multiple achievements, that only serve as a distraction, and adds nothing to the game, and extremely repetitive game-play, that suffers from a very poor cover system and health that regenerates after a few seconds, the only good point I can think of about this game is that the AI is marginally better than other FPS games. Overall I uninstalled this game, as I was too bored to carry on, and it was using up precious hard drive space. Expand
  26. Jun 22, 2011
    10
    Perfect follow-up to F.E.A.R. 2, the new "Leveling" system is something I really liked- no more hunting to try and get 5 hours of slow-motion, it progresses naturally as well as the rest of your character. The AI is much better than the previous game (it seamed like you could just get head shots for days in the previous because they'd never hide right.) Playing as Fettel? Pretty awesome and makes the campaign replayable another time so despite having a... I guess 4-5 hour campaign you can double that or at least another 3 hours. I've yet to play the multiplayer, but that seems to be everyones favorite part! I can't help but give this game a 10 if you love F.E.A.R. Expand
  27. Jun 23, 2011
    8
    I remember when I first played the original FEAR on the PC and how much it scared the crap out of me. That was in 2004 and FEAR offered a really unique experience for its time. Then FEAR 2 came out 5 years later and had pretty much the same mechanics, but it was just...not nearly as scary and had a bland plot. Don't get me wrong, I loved FEAR 2. It was full of awesome action and I never get tired of wiping out an entire room of cloned super-soldiers in slow motion. Oh, and don't forget the awesome melee combat. I was afraid they removed it in FEAR 3 until I leveled up for the first time and unlocked the slide kick. It felt good to know that Monolith hadn't abandoned one of the best things about the series.

    Anyway, FEAR 3 is like FEAR 2, except it's...even less scary and the story is even less interesting. However, I didn't buy the game expecting it to scare me whilst keeping me enthralled in its story, but I certainly hoped it would. FEAR 3's multiplayer features are definitely the highlight of the game. The contraction scenario is definitely my favorite.

    In shot, if you buy this game expecting it to match the charm of the first game in every way, you will definitely be disappointed. But if you're in to cooperative and other awesome multiplayer game modes, topped with the core features that make every FEAR game unique from other shooters, then you will like this game.


    Some other tidbits I should mention are performance. The game runs great on my PC with max settings, but I have anti-aliasing off, otherwise it's a slide show. My specs are as follows:

    Nvidia GTS 250 512mb

    Intel Core2Duo E6400 2.13 ghz CPU

    3GB RAM

    Windows 7 Ultimate 32-bit


    If you can run FEAR 2, then you can run this game just as easily, if not better.
    Expand
  28. Jun 25, 2011
    5
    I'm a big fan of the FEAR series and this comes as a huge disappointment. Apart from the odd few creepy moments this feels like a generic console shooter like Call of Duty. I spent the first few levels doing nothing but crouching behind strategically placed barricades whilst being shot at by relentless waves of soldiers. I moved on a few yards and did the same thing again...and again. It felt like one of those dumb amusement arcade shoot-em-ups and not the worthy sequel to the creepy, immersive and sometimes shocking games I have played previously.
    Just to underline the fact that this is a game aimed firmly at console CoD players you are frequently notified by an irritating pop-up message that you have attained some "achievements". This may appeal to some people but I couldn't care less if I've shot ten people in a row or hidden behind a barricade for 60 seconds. The achievement system does nothing but pull you out of the game and remind you that it's just a duck shoot.
    The game's single player campaign is therefore sadly very disappointing. The two player co-op mode and the multiplayer scenarios are apparently very good (I haven't played them) and I suspect the game designers had this much more in mind than an immersive single player experience.
    The graphics are also below par, giving the game a fuzzy and unfocused appearance and the level design, while quite intricate and detailed, is extremely linear - so much so that in some places there are even black arrows on the walls of buildings showing you which way to go in case you're too dumb to work it out for yourself.
    So there we have it: another dumbed down console port for trigger happy teenagers. Maybe I'm getting too old now but I prefer something with a little bit more depth, variety and strategy and not just a frantic button-mashing experience.
    Expand
  29. Jun 26, 2011
    7
    I remember how i was scared in original FEAR, i barely even finished that game. In second FEAR it wasn't scary that much, but still, i could say that im playing FEAR. Now, its not FEAR anymore, yeah i had great time with my friend playing co-op, but its not scary at all. (7.0)
  30. Jul 7, 2011
    4
    El juego es monótono hasta decir basta, la historia incoherente, los niveles son una linea recta, no da absolutamente nada de miedo ni susto. Y el hermano con superpoderes se supone que solo lo ves tu, entonces ¿cómo le disparan los marines contra los que juegas si solo le ves tú?
  31. Jul 18, 2011
    5
    Fear 3 (I'm not calling it F3AR or whatever) tries to do many things but winds up being, at best, average at all of them. For example, they added a cover system, which, while it isn't the most clunky one I've experienced, it's also not the best and makes me wonder why it was included at all. The effectiveness of bullet time has been reduced by a large degree, making it quick to get used up and slow to charge, perhaps due to the aforementioned cover system. There's a 2 weapon limit and some really overpowered melee abilities (there are youtube videos of people clearing levels with only melee). Effective use of grenades is nearly impossible. I can count the scary moments on one hand. There's a strange RPG-esque in-game levelling up system. etc. etc. etc... Fear 3 tried to be many things it's not, and it shows. Expand
  32. Aug 6, 2011
    4
    F.E.A.R. 3 is a really big disappointment.I've never played 1 and 2.I played 3 and I was expecting to fear.I waited for it but I didn't fear.There's nothing to fear.It was just an ordinary FPS.I bored when I played.
  33. Mar 14, 2012
    4
    After playing "FEAR 3" I was very, VERY disappointed. As a fan of the orignal FEAR I always loved the adrenaline rush and the tense moments of the game. It always sorta wanted me to...continue on the game on and on. "FEAR 3" is a different picture here. Except for the decent graphics everything has changed, BIG TIME. Wtf happened to all the med packs and armor? The various weapons? The smart AI enemies? The player-involving story? The scary environments? Expand
  34. Jul 2, 2011
    4
    Not as good as F.E.A.R. 2, nowhere near as good as the original F.E.A.R. The game gets points for outstanding enemy A.I. and some originality in the co-op department. I also like the reduced ammo capacity, which forces you to be a little more careful where you shoot, but why only two guns? What was wrong with three?

    The graphics are not as good as F.E.A.R. 2. There's absolutely no
    excuse for that, even for it being a console port, but Day 1 could redeem themselves somewhat if they follow Crytek's lead and release a DX11 texture pack in the near future.

    The keyboard controls are unnatural and the mouse control is unresponsive. The cover system is an unnecessary addition. There was nothing wrong with how it worked in F.E.A.R. 2.

    What happened to the story?! What happened to exploring every room to find snippets of lore and backstory hidden in files or voice mails?

    Most importantly, what happened to the scare? The game will make you jump at times because oh no a light bulb burst, etc. But it won't frighten you like the first two games did. This is the biggest disappointment. Day 1 simply can't bring the scare the way Monolith did.

    Right now it's 4/10. If Day 1 gives us some patches to smooth out the mouse controls, and if they release a DX11 texture pack, I'll bump it up to 7.
    Expand
  35. Jan 18, 2012
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I loved the first title, It had exciting shootouts, great graphics and excellent AI. The second one was average, having nothing really new to say, but as a a hardcore shooter, it was even better. Now we have this disaster made by Day 1 Studios, people who just ported the first F.E.A.R. on the consoles. The story is nonexistent. If F.E.A.R. 2 at least had some sort of story, Here you just run from Point A to Point B, shooting everything on your way, two(the bridge and the market) levels were made just to extend four hour(!) campaign as they have absolutely no other purpose. The same goes for the entire campaign. It's boring, very predictable and uninteresting. Many things just don't make any sense at all. Why Becket is so important to anyone? How capturing him will lead someone to Alma? How do you suddenly teleport from the airport terminal to some vault? Where the hell is the U.S. Military? The game is just so full of plot holes. Graphics are horrible: low quality textures, poor lighting, old animations. As for models, well, The Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher bay,released in 2004 , had more detailed models than this abomination( You can check that , if you want).Despite all this, F.E.A.R. 3 runs badly as it is unoptimized. But more importantly, guns (except for the rifle) behave badly and shootouts are boring. As for scares, well, F.E.A.R. series wasn't really scary to begin with, but the horror elements did add unique and interesting atmosphere. Here this atmosphere is gone.The game doesn't even try to scare you. Playing as Fettel is fun for some time, but then you realize, that for the most part it's the same as playing Pointman, only without slow-motion. The co-op seems to be normal, but there are other co-op shooters, much better than this and multiplayer may satisfy someone for a short time. Overall, a very boring Co-op shooter and not worthy of called F.E.A.R. Expand
  36. Jun 29, 2011
    8
    I was worried about FEAR 3 as it was in the hands of a different developer. But they (day 1 studios) proved fairly true to the FEAR franchise with FEAR 3, although not as many scares or jumpy sections as i would of liked, it still provided a few moments where i did jump. It doesn't really use any new techniques to scare the player either which is partially why i would say its not too scary. Graphics have certainly improved compared to FEAR 2, the fog/mist and lighting effects in this game are nothing but SUPERB! I do not understand the few people who claim it has bad graphics, sure it occasionally has a low resolution texture here and there...but they aren't too common. I run this game comfortably at 60fps with vsync on and everything max, although it dips rarely. (i5-750, 4gb ram ATI HD6970) Multiplayer is certainly entertaining in FEAR 3, with 4 different game modes and co-op campaign, there's more to do after you finish single player which is certainly an improvement over FEAR 2. It clearly is a console port, and mouse controls although work fine...just seem and feel a bit weird (i ended up using a 360 controller for it) A new cover system is introduced which works fairly well, which i often made use of during my time playing. FEAR 3 tells and explains the story better than its predecessors as well, through cgi cinematic's, memory playback style technique in-game, and lines the characters say. I have to say AGAIN i love the fog/mist/lighting effects in this game, it is used extremely well which creates a very FEARful atmosphere :) The graphics in this simply surpass FEAR 2 easily, and i have no clue as to why there are people claiming FEAR 2's graphics are better maybe they have crap PC's? Maybe they haven't been through all the video settings? Who knows.......Basically if you enjoy a good shooter, a few scares , and multiplayer/co op then this is a game for you. Expand
  37. Jun 26, 2011
    7
    Enjoyable, a bit scary, bloody and solid FPS. SP's worth a play. In terms of special and light effects F.E.A.R. graphics engine deserves a medal. In terms of textures it does not. There could have been less of that funky console stuff. You know... collectibles etc. Horror game is not a good place to put such fireworks in.
  38. Jun 28, 2011
    1
    From a fan of the original and a PC gamer this is quite a saddening release. Fear 2 didn't do the franchise justice but it didn't completely butcher it like this release did. I couldn't care less about graphics, but the entire atmosphere is gone, the gameplay is mediocre at best and it feels like more of a console port than any PC release I have played so far. If you liked fear at all, stay the hell away from this title. Expand
  39. Nov 12, 2013
    6
    As someone who tends to play single player I found this more than a little disappointing. The previous games had all had interesting storylines and managed to get beyond the whole "call of duty with superpowers" thing. But sadly this just isn't as good as the earlier games for that. Story feels disjointed and there are still parts of the map you can get stuck on so you can't move and have to reload a checkpoint. Expand
  40. Nov 14, 2011
    2
    Potential spoilers ahead.

    The original developers of fear delivered a masterpiece in horror FPS, one day studios did the port and have pushed this out. On reflection their title was apt, it does feel like this was written in a day.
    It uses all the current popular media and horror tropes and recycles as many ideas from the previous games (and games from other developers) it creates a
    straight line game with decent amount of flair.
    It's fun and they have mixed the game up so it doesn't get too repetitive (more on this later) that is actually pretty fun to run and gun with.
    So why the low score?
    Well it has some pretty nasty problems, the game feels like it's built around the setpieces with the story rewritten to "sort of" fit, it also fields like they got 70% the way though developing the game and either ran out of money and pushed it out the door or just simply gave up caring as it lurches from level to level with severe themeing changes, early on the coherence is kept by some fun cutscenes but even these are sidelined leaving the latter part of the game feeling a confusing and incoherent mess. (such as it is)
    The game was clearly written for co-op play then about 80% the way though the game it "introduces" something that has been a core gameplay mechanic for one of the players since the beginning and this was purely to kill off an NPC who's sole existence in this game was just as an excuse to build a level around it (see narrative trauma above) Then there is a "twist" to the co-op that makes no sense either, the game encourages you to work together for big kills but yet has a competition element to that completely sets the ending meaning that while you are supposed to be working together you are actually competing so better off working alone and screwing the other guy over... kind of whacked for a co-op game no?? (great idea guys, which committee dreamt up having a co-op game where you encourage players NOT to work together..)

    OK so we have a fun but inconstant game, that looks quite nice and plays reasonably well, am I being harsh... Well personally my biggest beef with the game is just the fact that it's offensively short, by which I mean after some technical setup problems my friend and I completed the game in under 3.5 hours and we weren't even rushing! I have played DLC which is longer.
    Also the last level makes no sense what so ever...
    Expand
  41. Jan 27, 2012
    5
    This game was a little bit fun. It was a good game, but just a bad F.E.A.R. game. FEAR 1+expansions were all AWESOME! Simply awesome. The second was good as well, because it still had that original feel to it sometimes. But the third is just bad. Just...bad. It ruined the story, it seems to completely ignore major plot twists and facts from previous F.E.A.R. games. And the textures are almost all extremely low-quality. Possessed enemies having low-res hands can be accepted, but multiplayer hands being 1x1 pixels? No. Just no. The FOV is sickeningly low, too. At least it can be changed in a config.

    This game is just a bad F.E.A.R. game. Only buy it if you have all other F.E.A.R. games. Otherwise, skip this game and play the others first. See how great they were.
    Expand
  42. May 27, 2012
    4
    Broken multiplayer. Way too much motion blur. The shooting feels dated, (it is the fear engine). Also, CONSOLE PORT, no dedicated servers. Hence the broken multiplayer. I can't connect to anybody and I have port forwarded for this game. The only game where I have not been able to connect to anybody. GG.
  43. Jul 17, 2012
    10
    over all awesome great fantastic game with friends multiplayer lots of fun i give it a 10 should be lower but we need more people downloading and playing this game come on guys give it a shot spread with friend you will enjoy it
  44. Aug 2, 2012
    2
    I was severely disappointed with this installment in the series. The first thing that was horribly done was the difficulty. Any encounter with a mech suit indefinitely resulted in several reloads. You died extremely easily and quickly even on the easiest difficulty setting. Not to mention the unnecessarily large amount of cultists thrown at you all at once. I also constantly ran out of ammo and found myself spending more time looking for another weapon from cover than actually shooting. The enemies were annoyingly precise and apparently have skulls made of titanium as head shots were performed without results. The pace was extremely slow and the screen effects didn't in any shape or form make the atmosphere unsettling, they simply made it difficult to see. The cover system...don't even get me started. Where did this crappy idea come from? Most of the time you find yourself behind cover with a hovering electric grenade behind you killing you without indication. Also, why was the mystery of Point Man's appearance blown right at the beginning? I'm about 4 hours in only signed up with Metacritic to warn both fans of the Fear franchise and of FPS games that this will most likely piss you off the whole way through. I'm with many of the other reviewers on this one....I simply can't continue playing this terrible game. Expand
  45. Jun 25, 2011
    5
    Neither a bad nor great game, just middle of the road. Not scary, so the horror element is wasted - in fact, it gets in the way most of the time when you want to shoot something. Graphics range from the good (enemies, soldiers, mechs) to the awful (low res environmentals). Cover system, regenerating health, yawn. Unimaginative, poor story, worse horror, and COD-borrowed combat mechanics. Enemy AI is so-so. Skip it or buy it when it's cheap. Expand
  46. Jul 5, 2011
    2
    This is simply bad game. Nothing else. Terrible GFX and music, stupid gameplay, only AI is good.
  47. Jun 28, 2011
    9
    I really like that kind of 3D shooter "horror movie", so very good graphics Directx 11, superb audio atmosphere, AI is very interesting.., the level of difficulty is correct (checkpoint). The game is fun, I give 9 score.
  48. Jun 28, 2011
    6
    This game has a more varied environment than the first, the combat is better than the second and Point Man is back. All in all its a good time if you like the series. Point Man is still the badass silent type. It's weighed down by bad parts though...... You gain XP during each interval for doing mundane stuff, you get very large very annoying pop up achievements during gun play that show the XP you get..... You only get two weapons at a time, the pistol (Which is actually a well done weapon) takes a rifle slot.... The cover system is a joke and is clearly made for consoles, its obvious because you get the popups with key needed to activate cover or other interactions (annoying, keep that in console games.)... Theres a good shooter in this title, the weapons are well done (unlike the SMG from HL2...), however this game suffers from console influence. The prone and lean left/right that made FEAR1 a good shooter is replaced by a console style cover system. Also the awesome radio operator from FEAR1 is gone... 6/10, this game is kept above water by the face its shooting is good. Expand
  49. Jun 22, 2011
    7
    Loses a point for not having the jump kick (why take that out that was so sweet!!!) and the new automated melee. Also some funky key assignment features. For a game that does not look that cutting edge and has some low res textures the game still feels it could have been optimized better for PC. Hopefully a patch can fix this. The FPS seems a little to erratic and yes I have a beast of a PC. FOV seems a little consolish to me. I've had a game for two days and have not seen but one game online yet .Hopefully more people will pick it up and play the online portion. I like the CO OP aspect of the game and I think that is a nice addition. Over all, the game is still a lot of fun to play, still creepy and AI is still top notch especially on harder difficulties. A decent shooter that everyone can enjoy but original FEAR fans might find some grips with it. Expand
  50. Jun 25, 2011
    9
    I love the FEAR franchise!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  51. Jul 6, 2011
    6
    Being a fan of the FEAR series, I have been waiting for this game for MONTHS. Sadly, it does not deliver. Console ports should never make it to a PC...it is a step backwards in a game that was initially PC-based. This should have never been written for PC's, plain and simple. As a console game, it would be great, but as a PC game, a solid 6 is all it is worth...
  52. Jul 3, 2011
    6
    I was really hoping Monolith would develop this game instead of Day 1 Studios. The different feeling game engine and controls really disappointed me. The first two F.E.A.R. games (and their expansions) were nothing but pure brilliance. It's as if Day 1 Studios were intentionally trying to take the franchise a few steps back. The previous games were fun the entire way, while this game was more "Meh, I just wanna finish this game so I can see the ending already..." for me.

    This was a good game, but it fell so far below my expectations. The story was bland, and the game got horribly repetitive at times. Toward the end of the game is awesome, but everything before that just isn't that interesting. If I could rewind time and make Monolith take the chair for this game, I would.
    Expand
  53. Jul 22, 2011
    5
    This is not one of the better games in the FEAR series. On the positive side, the story line continued to be compelling. Also, the graphics were somewhat better than the earlier series, with the exception of FEAR 2. The slo-mo feature is very convenient, especially when you're a neophyte gamer like myself. The downside for me was that Pointman seemed to be a very weak character, or the enemies were stronger. Speed was down and health was problematic. I liked the earlier games where you had control over the health. All of the enemies seemed to have an overabundance of grenades which they used liberally. While this added to the challenge, it became very annoying to me as the game progressed. Overall, I suggest waiting until this game goes on sale before rushing out to buy it like I did the other games in the FEAR series. Expand
  54. Aug 23, 2011
    6
    I had high hopes for this latest installment of Fear. I have played all of the Fear games. The first still being my favorite. Although 3 has better graphics and gib effects. It lacks the tension and horror that the first one had. The sound on the 3rd is quite good and as I mentioned the graphics are better but that doesn't make up for how short the single player game is I was very disappointed with the sudden short ending. Expand
  55. Dec 5, 2011
    5
    It pains me to give this game such a low score. I love the original F.E.A.R., it was so innovative at the time it came out, and scared the crap out of me. I had such huge anticipates for the sequels, and both have fallen flat for me. For one, the sequels are not as scary, and while graphically prettier, they have lost the "soul" of what made the original game so great. While F.E.A.R. 2 was a bit of a letdown, F.E.A.R. 3 was a major letdown. I understand that all 3 games where very linear, but at least the first one scared you and enthralled you as to the fusion of shooter and horror. But F.E.A.R. 3 was just dumb, it did not scare me, it was predictable, the premise idiotic, the conclusion left a sour taste in my mouth. It felt like the studios where looking to bank on reputation, and just put a mediocre product on the market knowing that the brand would pull all the suckers in. I was a sucker, but luckily at a discounted price from steam. I hope and prey, somebody brings this Franchise back from the level of mediocrity. Expand
  56. Jul 31, 2012
    3
    F.3.A.R is abysmal. It feels like Killzone on a PC and has gone the other side of the spectrum from the original. With no good features remaining from the previous two titles and just making the bad bits worse plus including an unacceptable completion time of 4 hours. F.3.A.R is a fitting end to a dying series, a good story but sadly was extremely poorly executed.
  57. Aug 1, 2011
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. An okay game if it wasn't under the F.E.A.R. name, otherwise this is just a pathetic attempt to make a horror game. Multi player seems to be the best part of the game and most developed, especially if you play through the campaign in 5 hours. Graphics are okay but not up to par and very unoptimized, sound is good, UI is okay, and weapons are balanced. The single player is repetitive with each chapter having you fight off against Aramcham soldiers and a few replicas (except for the last chapter). Only play this game if you want to know how the FEAR series will end, or find it in discounts and rental. Expand
  58. Jul 15, 2011
    8
    Despite the numerous, and not totally unjustified, remarks about the game being consolized, none of them really detract from FEAR 3 still being a solid game. The atmosphere and gameplay from the first two games remains, and this entry basically draws the whole story to a conclusion. The real shine to the game is playing as Paxton Fettel, which brings back memories of Messiah, except without being suck.

    If I had to say anything negative, it would be the need to unlock Fettel on each level instead of having him playable from the get go, as he is the far more enjoyable character to play.
    Expand
  59. Jul 20, 2011
    7
    This is a shame. What we've loved more from F.E.A.R. is gone, and now we play a Crysis clone game that aims to the general shooter industry instead of the well-known horror fans that throughout the years have supported the series. I'm not saying the game is bad, it's just simply good, and that's very sad is a series in with excellence is the common factor.
  60. Aug 8, 2011
    7
    Great co-op game play and achievements, who cares if its not scary at all, its the game play that counts and if people are expecting a fright then they should be able to deduce that its "co-op" not the classic single-player spooky campaign some traditionalist love and can't handle the change.
  61. Jul 22, 2012
    5
    Went into FEAR 3 hoping for what had warmed my heart to the series in earlier installments--strong visuals, difficult firefights against foes using tactical advances and flanking, a unique combat system (3 weapon slots instead of the standard 2, health being a strategic resource instead of regenerating over time, and a developed melee system), and a mythology that made FEAR more than just another shooter. FEAR 3 really didn't bring any of that. Upon first loading the game, I discovered that my monitor's native resolution (1280X1024, hardly exotic) wasn't supported natively, meaning I had to play the game at a blurry 1024X768. The firefights had become much simpler, concentrating on throwing waves and waves off foes at the player who seem to spend more time swearing than actually fighting. The weapons system has been downgraded to the standard two slots, and health now regenerates...this was where I realized what was going on. The entire game has been changed to make it more reminiscent of Call of Duty/Battlefield, and has discarded its own unique properties to instead ape those of the giant franchises. There is still FEAR's signature Slo-Mo power, but since the enemies don't fight tactically anymore, it's rarely necessary. Bizarrely, an arcade-style points system was included, complete with a flashy rewards placard that pops up in the lower left of the screen. This is a real immersion breaker, which is awful--horror games rely on immersion like few other genres. Nothing makes a scary situation boring than having a dialogue box pop up, rewarding you for spending 100 seconds behind cover. All in all, it just feels like Monolith has scrapped their neat franchise in favor of making a generic shooter. Oddly, the game is pretty good in this regard. The cover system is simple and intuitive, and the best I've seen in a first-person game (I especially like that it always stays first-person, instead of jumping to the third like many do). While the aforementioned arcade popups break the horror element, they are conducive to adrenaline-fueled heavy firefights. While the enemies are dumber, they are also more numerous and so some "pop-and-stop" cover-based shooting is required. None of it is deep, but it is pretty fun. Overall, I would say don't go into this expecting a horror shooter, and you can still have a good time. Expand
  62. Aug 11, 2011
    6
    Horror games r always fun to play, but there is something in this game that didn't really catch my eye. Ah yes the Graphics, the cover system, the time it takes to regenerate your health, the number of enemies that come to kill you at the same time and the off course the sad ending to the series. But still the game isn't that bad. For example The Co-op campaign, the sweat scoring system, the Scary moments, all of these things makes the game playable........thats why i have rated this game 6...not great but not bad as well. Expand
  63. Jul 2, 2011
    6
    Game is still a major console port despite the recent patch for the pc. Story is about 4-5 hours long. Story will confuse people who haven't played the previous ones. If your looking for scares, this game has lost all touch of it even with some Hollywood horror celebrities involved with FEAR 3. Multiplayer is great, but has no Deathmatch or Capture the flag maps, for those interested in that type of play avoid getting the game. Graphics aren't the best unless people have high end rigs able to play it with DX11. Co-op campaign isn't really anything huge to gripe about, but it's there for people to try it. Despite everything it's still a solid shooter. Expand
  64. Jun 30, 2011
    1
    What the heck????!!!! i bought this game in the understanding that it would surpase the previous fear 1 and 2 titles.(or at least match it)...and all i got was a poor console port????!!!! so angry right now.
  65. Aug 15, 2012
    6
    I recently acquired all the FEAR games through the 2012 Steam Summer Sale having never played any of them before. I played them all in order and FEAR 3 is not as bad as people on metacritic make it out to be. In fact, it's somewhat comparable to FEAR 2 in terms of gameplay with the twist that it incentivizes replayability in allowing players to control Fettel. The story mode is similar in length to FEAR 1 and 2 and is more similar to FEAR 2 in terms of gameplay. The player will fight hordes of Armacham goons and mechs and bland supernatural enemies that do nothing but lunge at you. As you play through each level as Point Man or Fettel, you earn huge score bonuses by completing challenges a la Call of Duty. Each level is scored and your final score tallied after the last boss fight. Depending on who has the higher score, Point Man or Fettel, one of multiple endings will be unlocked. This encourages players to replay the game as Fettel, attempt to top their previous high score as Point Man, and view the game's alternate ending. I find this a very creative approach to unlocking multiple endings and preferable to pressing a magic button during the last few minutes of play. Playing as Point Man, players must use slomo, cover, and a slim but solid variety of weapons to get through the game. Playing as Fettel, players can shoot psychic energy from their hands, possess enemy soldiers and slaughter their friends, and use telekinesis to throw objects. Despite the games linear level design, I was impressed by how well the layouts supported both drastically different styles of play. The gameplay, while fun, does nothing to innovate and brings absolutely nothing new to the series. The game is full of obnoxious scripted moments, blocked off areas players might be eager to explore, and tons of "Hey, player! Look at this and then we'll let you progress!" scenes. The game is also WAY too easy, even on the hardest difficulty. Your health and slomo bar simply regenerates way too fast. Removing health packs was a terrible design choice for FEAR. The enemy AI, as in the previous games, is more than competent, but your slomo lasts forever and your health regenerates super fast, you have no fear of death. The game is not scary at all either. It's full of cheap jump scares. There is never any genuine tension because the enemies are neither difficult to kill nor deadly. I would really recommend FEAR if you want closure to the FEAR story or are looking for a great co-op game. I wouldn't recommend this at all for multiplayer. I was unable to find a multiplayer match of any type running. Expand
  66. Aug 18, 2012
    7
    F.E.A.R 3 is an FPS shooter with horror elements, reminiscent of Doom 3 featuring modern FPS gameplay features such as regenerating health, being able to carry only two weapons and a cover system. The storyline continues where F.E.A.R 2 left off but adding a twist to the ending depending on whether Pointman or Fettel is played. During co-operative play, which works quite well, the player with the highest score determines the ending. Pointman is a regular grunt who can carry guns and has the ability to slow down time and perform special melee attacks that unlocks as he levels up while Fettel can shoot energy projectiles from his hands, levitate enemies with the purpose of getting them up from behind cover, possessing them or finishing them off with his melee attack if he is close. (Fettel performs a special attack when enemies are levitating which causes massive damage and may kill some weaker enemies outright). As mentioned, Fettel can possess nearly any human enemy soldier causing him to gain full control of their faculties but having to constantly kill enemies and collect their life-energy in order for him to remain inside the body. All in all F.E.A.R 3 is a very run-of-the-mill FPS shooter with some horror elements that are predictable and even somewhat annoying but the addition of Fettel and his special powers and solid gun-design make it a good FPS game despite it feeling rather short and even somewhat easy at times on the higher difficulties. Co-operative play makes up for a lot and works very well. A must-play for co-operative FPS-game fans. Expand
  67. Jul 15, 2011
    7
    7.0

    Instead of making your way through a lot of scary looking houses, you end up fighting against the authority. The intelligence of AI is always somewhat a focus point in these games, and while the AI in FEAR has improved, itâ
  68. Jul 24, 2011
    8
    it is good game but less creepy maybe disappoint you. nonetheless except that, this game is overall well. if you satisfy previous game-FEAR,FEAR2-, you would like it too.
  69. Jun 19, 2012
    6
    You know, the more first person shooters I play, the more I realize that game developers are completely unable to increase a game's difficulty without making it annoying. I only play games as long as they're fun (I don't care about forcing myself to complete them), and it seems like lately, I only get as far as the last level on 8/10 shooters. Including this game. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This game is not scary. At all. It is kinda fun anyway, though. The gun sounds/reactions are addicting (the assault rifle's burst fire especially), the "slo-mo" is as fun as ever, and the A.I. is fairly smart. Shotgun dudes will rush up to you, machine gun guys will stay back and run from cover-to-cover, etc. Nothing mind-blowing, but acceptable nonetheless. The graphics are good too, although it froze like CRAZY until I forced it to run in DX9 mode instead of DX11. Funny, since Nexuiz, Crysis 2, and AvP don't mind being in DX11 and fully maxed out. Anyway, it seemed like a pretty decent shooter until the last few levels, when the game decided to start spawning the little demon-dog things over and over and over and over and over and over and over. If I have to fight 20 of the things, then for the love of all that is holy, let me fight them all at once! Making me fight them one-at-a-time or two-at-a-time repeatedly is nothing but tedious and aggravating. Also in the later levels, when you have to fight the force commanders (I think), they have the most insanely, annoyingly, rage-inducingly horrendous voices ever. I get that they're supposedly talking through walkie-talkies or some other communicator, and therefore their voices should be midrange-heavy, but when they talked, I seriously had to take my headphones off of my head because it hurt so freakin' bad. It wasn't overly LOUD, per se, just absolutely the worst fustercluck of mish-mashed midrange noise EVER. Plus they were insanely annoying to fight in groups. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Overall, I'm glad I only spent $5 on this game. I wouldn't recommend anyone else spend any more on it, unless you're a diehard F.E.A.R. fan, but then again, as this is so different from the others in the series, fans might hate it too. Expand
  70. Sep 18, 2011
    7
    Although I am in agreement that this game doesn't hold a candle to the first two, the graphics that I experienced were very nice on my system. I didn't like the cover system too much (probably because I hated that concept in 007 Goldeneye for Wii) and the regeneration of health was a bit too easy. Perhaps I will try this on the hardest setting next. The story was fun and there were some scary moments. I have to say overall that it was worth playing the game and the multiplayer is enjoyable. I am indifferent about the purchase but have been about many game simply because of the price tag vs. the actual value I'm getting. i.e. How long is game play, innovation, controls, etc. I think it should have come with a slightly lower price tag but it seems the industry just keeps charging the same for all the new games coming out, only having to either drop the price or have them resold as used games (which doesn't apply to the PC version of this title). I recommend this title, but if you can find it used for the console or borrow a copy from a friend before you decide what port to buy. Expand
  71. Oct 7, 2011
    10
    I have to say, that this is the best zombie game ever, and one of the best games of 2011 . Awesome campaign, Huge co-op, and Epic multiplayer. In the end, this game is worth the money.
  72. May 29, 2012
    7
    Not the best in the series, but entertaining none the less. As previous F.E.A.R games, this one is everything but scary (Calling any of them scary is stupid). It's a nice action shooter with minimal RPG elements that is entertaining. I wouldn't say it brought anything new compared to previous games, but it's still worth playing.
  73. Jan 7, 2012
    9
    I love F.E.A.R. games and this one is no exception. I also love first person shooters the most, and FEAR3 is an improvenent to previous versions I believe. The FPS experience got an improvement and the AI is less predictable. The one thing I didnt see an improvement on was the graphics, the scary scenes, and the XPS computer logos on the screens. Graphics remain the same, if not worst, I play it at 1080p,using an nvidia gtx460 at medium settings on DX11 and doesnt look better that the one from 6 year ago. Also the scary scenes are not as suspenseful or nerve wracking as the first one. And last, where are the XPS computer logos ??? I miss them so much, specially since I am playing on a pc. We want the logo of the sponsoring computer company back, even if its not Dell, please. Putting that aside, this is the greatest game ever. Expand
  74. Jan 24, 2012
    8
    FEAR 3 is a fairly good installment into the series but it isn't scary, not at all scary. What it lakes in a scare factor is makes up in its disturbed storyline, since its mainly focused on the "brothers" and their past, what they went through ect. I feel that it was pretty disturbing at times. Visually the game looks good, and it will play on most modern day computers so you do not need a fancy graphics card, which isn't a bad thing. Day 1 Studios has made a good installment into the Fear series, I do think if Monolith developed it, they would have spent more time, and would have done a better job. As for game play Fear 3's strongest feature would be the co-op mode. Which of course you can play with your friends, one thing I didn't care for much would have to be the little Achievement boxes -so to speak- popping up every five seconds to let you know you did something unimportant. Last thing I'm going to address is the health system, I'm sure most of you are aware that it is regenerating health system, and I'm also sure some or most of you dislike it. Well I think it works for this game, it was meant for co-op so regenerating health makes sense to me, I'm not necessary a fan of it, I prefer carrying around bulky med-kits all around. None the less, Fear 3 is a good game, with Minor flaws any fans of the series will most likely overlook. 8 out of 10. Expand
  75. Jan 29, 2012
    8
    A great game for every gamer, the game combines the fast pace speed of an fps with an amnesia-like horror setting. The console-port disabilities is what's stopping this game from reaching it's greatest potential.
  76. Dec 11, 2013
    5
    What happened to this franchise?! It's an absolute mess. Mouse controls are messed up on PC, the story has degenerated into a confusing and nonsensical mess, and the scares are practically non-existent. What's left is a shallow first person shooter that doesn't do anything original or groundbreaking to separate itself from its predecessor. Truly a disappointing game.
  77. Mar 24, 2012
    7
    F.E.A.R 3 may not be good like 2 first F.E.A.R games but story is really good.
    Graphics are ok but not the best and it's lame console port.
    Gameplay is relly good but only problem is that mouse control is too fast or too slow, you just can't get it right.
    Level desing is the worst in F.E.A.R series it's too linear and theres some parts where you really get your self lost and finding right
    plase might take 5-20 min.
    Co-op is nice to have but i don't have tested yet.
    Overall 20â
    Expand
  78. Jul 20, 2012
    5
    I got this game with a buddy in July 2012 when it was on Steam's Summer Sale for 5 bucks. We played through the co-op storyline, on normal, which took roughly 7 hours. The game wasn't too bad, we didn't play the first two, and I think that contributed to enjoying the third more. The graphics were ok, there were some low res parts that made us laugh, like when we were inside one of the houses and looked out a window, there was a very low res sky box that reminded us of DOOM. There was also the helicopter drops, every time (spoiler!) Alma would have a contraction a copter would drop out of the sky. Wish I kept count, it happened a lot. All around I give the game a 5, because it is average. It had a lot of good "scary" parts, and the environment really helped, but when you got into the combat arenas, and there were a lot, you could tell it's a shooter, and not so much survivor horror. Also, Point Man never said any words, ever. Maybe it was his character, due to his memories being wiped? I dunno, but the cut scenes left something to be wanted when every conversation between the brothers was one way. So, you got a buddy and wanna spend an evening shooting monsters? Get the game for 5 bucks, but don't pay anymore then that. Expand
  79. Jan 3, 2013
    5
    The levels and enemies are not scary. The gameplay is generic FPS "doable without brains" lame. The guns feel feel like 5 minutes was all the developers had to think and make them in-game. The characters could have been far more interesting but aren't. The game should be better than FEAR 2 but it isn't. Should you pay more than $15? Hell no.
  80. May 20, 2013
    4
    i got this game thinking, Oh boy, a scary coop game! well it turned out to be a average shooter with good coop.but i am sick of the shooters that call themselves "scary." I remember playing fear 2 with better graphics and accually on the edge of my pants. huge dissapointment
  81. Aug 7, 2013
    6
    This game gets really abusive with the cover tactics. So much so it gets really difficult even when you aren't that far into the game and have to keep changing tactics which is fun for a little while, but with the scoring system this is clearly a game that is made or 2 people and not 1.
  82. Nov 8, 2013
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Ugh where do i start the graphics are horrible and its barely linked to f12r fear 1-2) you might as well make this one the first one cause all we know is beckets sons is just some cannibal nazi and the other just some long haired loser with reflex sprinkled on top... Expand
  83. Nov 14, 2013
    4
    This game has nothing with FEAR and FEAR 2. Only names are used from old FEAR games, otherwise is completely different game. And terrible. I finished that, because I wanted to have good feeling and finish all FEAR games. Otherwise it will be uninstalled after few hours of gameplay.
    There is missing athmosphere, scary moments, feelings, you are in some horror, story..
    Only graphic is better.
  84. Nov 18, 2013
    1
    Not fun. Tedious linear gameplay. I do not recommend playing it, even if it's free.

    That being said, I played the co-op online with a friend and it was slightly better but only because everything is better with friends, even hell.
  85. Dec 16, 2013
    2
    I'm only giving this 2 points, 2 above the lowest score, because the game works. But apart from that there is really nothing positive to say. I've picked it up during the WB Humble Bundle and can say that I am damn lucky not having to pay the full price for this garbage. The first FEAR was great, the second really good but this is just the embodiment of the brainless consolised decilne FPS's underwent the last few years. There is nothing left from the last games, only weak graphics an sound, overabused cover mechanics, retarded AI (its like shooting ducks from cover, they also don't react while being shot, just run for cover) and cheap horror gimmics. Stay away if you don't want to spoil yourself the whole franchise! Expand
  86. Mar 11, 2014
    6
    Having played all the previous FEAR games I found this to be quite a switch. If the previous FEAR games never existed and this game was released it might have done slightly better, but in the end I think it would still have been considered mediocre.

    Is it mediocre? I think so in a lot of ways. But first I want to talk about the graphics, because I'm not entirely sure what to think about
    them. In some ways the graphics are really impressive, and the game is very cool to look at. But on close inspection a lot of things seem outdated. Examples would be looking out the windows in the suburbs levels, there is a flat picture texture behind the window, this is also used for landmarks very far away. The resolution on these textures isn't high enough that it looks good, because I think it CAN look good. If you're just passing through sure it looks fine, but I like to look at every little thing in a game and a lot of the time I end up looking at these flat backdrops and just think "a game from 2011 decided to do this." Another example is the mountains in the slums area. These backdrop textures stuck out to me the most. The graphics aren't bad but they're nothing to have a party over.

    One thing about the graphics style I really liked in particular was the BLOOD. It is by far the single most impressive thing about FEAR 3, and I don't mean the static blood that just happens to be thrown around a level, I'm talking about when you shoot a guy in the face as he's standing against a wall. The blood in this game flows down walls and slopes. It's not a perfect flow ALA real life mechanics, but it's still visually impressive and immerses you in the violence.

    Overall though, I wasn't blown away by much in the game other than that tiny blood detail. It was fun to play but it wasn't scary at all. Which was disappointing considering I was hoping for more scares akin to the previous games. The game has potential but it basically Command and Conquer 4'd itself. It changed the original formula TOO much (the second game changed a lot of the combat style, but the tone was still the same) and then wanted to be a multiplayer shooter in an already saturated shooter market. It was almost as if it was trying to be call of duty with the no health kits - and if you're looking to play a game like call of duty, wouldn't you buy call of duty instead of risking your money on a franchise that was supposed to be nothing like COD?

    I give it a 6 because a lot of the multiplayer CO-OP modes, like contractions, are genuinely fun. Single player is ok, but the writing is corny to the point where you can hardly take it seriously and the game itself isn't that scary, and let's be honest, that's what everyone was expecting from a FEAR game.
    Expand
  87. Apr 4, 2014
    7
    FEAR 3 is not really FEAR. It's not the same gameplay, it's not horror, it's not a singleplayer focus. Sure, I enjoyed my time with the game, but i certainly won't recommend it for people looking for a good singleplayer experience or a horror fill. FEAR 1 was somewhat scary, FEAR 2 was scary in like 2 parts, FEAR 3 isn't scary at all. They also added a Coop mode. Coop games, by definition, cannot be scary. The game honestly felt so consolized and simplified that it has pretty much ruined the franchise. You have tons of multiplayer modes and coop, and a super short campaign (I beat it in 3.5 hours on Insane difficulty). For PC players, there is no local coop, and the FOV is quite low. The game still has serious bugs and glitches. The story has never really made sense or been interesting in FEAR games, but in FEAR 3 it takes that to a whole new level. Not only is it uninteresting, but it's nonsensical and most of the time you won't have any idea what's going on. Despite all these flaws, it's a good shooter in its own right. IF you approach the game by itself and hope for a decent experience, you will most likely find one. If you approach it as FEAR game, you will be very disappointed. Expand
  88. Nov 12, 2012
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Nothing scary, creepy, mind-f:ing...no nothing, just plain shooting and possessing. If I wouldn't have played any earlier versions of FEAR then I would maybe think that this is good but I have played them and this really isn't good, I'm disappointed! ...and just to make things worse, I played it on xbox...and it was my first time ever truly grabbing a xbox-controller and it only took me 4hours to complete the game at the hardest difficulty level and when I finished that I unlocked one more which was even easier -___-

    - way too short
    - too easy
    - bad/non existing story

    + graphics + controls
    Expand
  89. Dec 10, 2013
    4
    Who slopped their Call of Duty all over my F.E.A.R.? That's what I'm constantly asking myself. It's definitely the poorest, weakest entry in to the franchise so far. Not as scary or engaging, and the game play has been toned down in to this horrible call of duty style cover shooter with health regen and bad A.I.. How can you justify having bad A.I. in a series that's known for pushing the envelope in that department? As a huge F.E.A.R. and F.E.A.R. 2 fan who's not particularly fond of Call of Duty or its imitators, this is a mediocre and ultimately forgettable FPS that just happens to have some F.E.A.R. branding slapped on it. I felt like it was a chore I forced myself through to see the continuation of the story from two games that I actually enjoyed. Expand
  90. Apr 3, 2014
    1
    Games are getting worse and dumbed down for the lowest casual denominator. For soccer dads.
    I remember playing the original F.E.A.R. it scared the hell out of me. It was horrifying and original.
    This here is a piece of crap. Sure, i'll play it. But it's forgettable.
  91. Oct 3, 2012
    8
    This game isn't perfect but it isn't bad either and I don't regret buying and playing through it. The graphics aren't as great as F.E.A.R. 2 but it was a bit more challenging if only because you ran out of ammo faster than in previous games causing you to do more risky maneuvers to get more/survive. Where I thought F.E.A.R. was more action/psycologoically scaryand F.E.A.R. 2 was more in your face scary/action , F.E.A.R. 3 is more action than scary but the scary parts are pretty well done and interesting. I would recommend playing it just to see how the story ends. As that's one part of the game they did a great job on. Expand
  92. Jul 18, 2013
    9
    This is such an under-rated game. Action/10, Horror/5-6, Story/7, CO-OP/9 and Overall Gameplay/8. Fear 3 has a bit of everything and it blends together SO well. Using Paxton Fettle is fantastic, the machanics of it just feels so right and this game is honestly one of the best CO-OP games I've played in a while. A must have but maybe not for it's full price.
  93. Jul 21, 2013
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. As a horror shooter this is a let down BUT as a action shooter game this is a great game. Graphics are great and gameplay exciting.
    The co-op isn't so good in my opinion though. The 2nd user plays as Fettel who is a ghost... who gets killed by getting shot at..
    Playing as Fettel doesn't really work as his character doesn't make sense. If you want this as a single player then it's great but the co-op isn't as fun.
    Expand
  94. Dec 15, 2013
    8
    Day 1 Studios gave the new F.E.A.R. game the refreshing stimulus the franchise has deserved after the second entry. While F.E.A.R. 2 was a solid FPS it was also old with ageing mechanics that couldn't held up against the best in the genre. The latest game became modernish with updated gameplay mechanics. On one hand it was a good decision (it had to be done), on other side it isn't unique enough to separate itself from the competition.

    F.3.A.R starts off 8 months after the second game. Point Man is our protagonist once again and he has to team up with his long gone brother, Fettel to get out of a prison and find his squad mate, Jin, who is in danger. Paranormal activities are a big part of this game too. Only this time around Alma isn't the antagonist, but something called the Creep. The story of the game won't leave any deep marks in you. It's flat and uninteresting. It's hard to take the story seriously when it doesn't prove its worthiness. Your personal goal will be reaching checkpoints after checkpoints to beat campaign. And it will be done after just around 6 hours. It's a shame really because with a more intriguing story this game could have made a mark.

    Luckily F.E.A.R. 3 isn't short on content. Not at all. After completing the campaign you can kill your time with various game modes. Many of them are essentially a modified version of the original campaign, but the changes made in those modes are not only worth a try but also great fun. The campaign is made of 8 intervals, each of them takes around 30-45 minutes to complete. After completing an interval you can replay it as Point Man or Fetter with all its unique psychic abilities. He has the ability to posses common enemies. You'll appreciate the change of pace.

    Also, you can hop in a co-op campaign with your friend. One controls Fettel the other Point Man. It isn't a novelty at all, but great to see the developer putting in the game options like this. When you exploit everything the single player modes can offer there is a multiplayer option in the game. Sadly the multiplayer of the third game was never as popular as the first game's MP. If you want to try this option most likely you have to play with your own friends as very few gamers are left playing F.3.A.R. over the internet.

    Moving to different territories, the looks of the game are passable. It's isn't a beautiful, nor a bad looking game. To its defense they put more emphasis on minor details, so this time a book on a table will actually look like one instead of a bunch of blurred pixels. The gameplay has been completely refreshed. The previous game in the franchise was getting old and set back by wrong decisions during the development. Not this game though. It feels like a modern shooter where you bullets do matter. When you shoot a soldier in this feet he grabs it or tumbles and the gunfight is much more vivid and powerful. Day 1 made the right decisions to cut the useless features and refresh the remaining ones. It's a great shooter, but beyond that it offers nothing more. Nothing that could differentiate this game from the others.

    Fear in F.E.A.R. 3 is almost non existent. There are moments here and there when you'll look around suspiciously, but that's about it. The franchise has switched genres over the years. From psychological horror it became a solid action oriented shooter. We can't say it was a bad decision, but we can say that there isn't many horror games in the market while there's a legion of action shooters to choose from; good, bad or worse. It's a pity that in this era a franchise has to get more action oriented to survive, and sometimes even that might not be enough. Again, F.E.A.R. 3 is a great shooter and it definitely benefited from the changes made around it, but the industry and the gamers might not.

    Rating: 80/100; Replay Value: 3/5; To Beat: 6 hours; Played on: normal.
    Expand
  95. Aug 29, 2013
    9
    Lacking in the single-player department, but one of the most fun games I've played in co-op. The asymmetrical nature of the co-op campaign leaves plenty of different ways to approach the levels. I realize its a fair departure for the series, but taken as it is, quite the fun game to play with a friend.
  96. Sep 16, 2013
    7
    Alma está de regreso en la tercera parte de esta serie de FPS la cual a pesar de no haber recibido buenas críticas en su segunda entrega, llega FEAR 3 por parte de WB Games y desarrollado por Day 1 Studios con varias mejoras que analizaremos en esta reseña.

    Qué bonita familia

    Primero que nada para aquellos que no conozcan esta serie, les comento que la historia es acerca de una niña
    con poderes paranormales, llamada Alma, quien es utilizada por una compañía de nombre Armacham, para formar un ejército de soldados replicants o clones, el cual será controlado por alguno de sus generales con poderes psíquicos …….no muy original pero lo interesante es, que en uno de esos tantos intentos de controlar a Alma, se crearon dos prototipos de generales que fueron creados con células de Alma y del director de Armacham, Harlan Wade, quien los crió, si se puede llamar así a tenerlos en un cuarto y hacer experimentos con ellos todos los días, ahora tomaremos el control de estos dos prototipos como nuestros personajes principales Point Man y Fettel.

    La tercera parte de esta saga se lleva a cabo poco tiempo después del final de FEAR 2 pero con el protagonista del primer juego, Point Man, que junto con su hermano Fettel trataran de reunirse con su madre, la cual está a punto de dar a luz, aunque cada uno con sus propias intenciones.

    Pasando a lo que es el gameplay, se trata de un First Person Shooter pero con el toque de terror que caracteriza a la serie, tal vez no sea mucho, pero, lograra hacerte saltar de tu asiento más de una vez.

    Dos protagonistas, dos estilos

    Una de las cosas innovadoras en la serie es el modo cooperativo para 2 personas que te permite jugar la campaña controlando a los 2 hermanos, los cuales tienen sus propias ventajas/desventajas para los diferentes estilos de juego, donde tenemos a Point Man, que tiene el poder de alentar el tiempo para así poder destruir a sus enemigos con mayor facilidad, además de poder utilizar cualquiera de las armas que encuentre en su camino, y a Fettel que puede tomar el cuerpo de sus enemigos, hacerlos flotar, lanzarles objetos o dispararles con sus manos unos rayos de energía que aunque no les hacen mucho daño, son infinitos, pero tiene la desventaja de no poder tomar ningún arma a menos que esté controlando a algún soldado enemigo.

    Juega en línea….. pero con quien

    El modo cooperativo se puede jugar con 2 personas en tu casa o en línea, aunque en estos días que lo estuve jugando no encontré a nadie que estuviera en línea, lo que puede ser una señal de que pronto cerraran los servidores. Pero en lo que es el modo multijugador si había varios conectados, así que pude checar la opción de “sobrevive” en la que te encuentras en una casa en medio de la ciudad y como su nombre lo dice, no tienes mas opción que sobrevivir a las hordas de enemigos que te aparecerán, desde soldados simples hasta criaturas con forma de hombres lobo como las que aparecen durante el modo historia del juego.

    ¿Porque jugarlo?

    Una de las razones que les puedo dar, es que si bien no es un FPS refinado como COD o BF3, no es malo y el agregado de terror creo que le suma los puntos suficientes para que le des una oportunidad, además del modo cooperativo off-line.

    También les digo a todos los que han jugado las anteriores entregas, vale la pena jugar esta tercera parte que es la continuación a la historia de los anteriores y no los decepcionara.

    Algo que me fascino fueron las partes en que esta todo oscuro y solo alcanzas a ver lo que tu lámpara logra iluminar y en algunos momentos hasta se te llega a apagar dándote la sensación de que estas en una obscuridad total, todo esto mientras tienes a varias criaturas detrás de ti, esa sensación vale el juego.

    ¿Porque NO jugarlo?

    Quiero comentar que la primera falla del juego está desde la portada la cual nos muestra a los 2 personajes principales con un look diferente al que tienen en el juego, que la verdad nunca entendí ya que el del juego es mejor al presentado en la portada.

    Si eres de los que buscan los mejores gráficos en cada uno de sus juegos, se desilusionaran con este, porque se nota que no fue su mayor prioridad y casi puedo asegurar que se reciclaron muchas cosas del 2 tanto en los escenarios como en los enemigos que se ven iguales a los del anterior juego de hace 3 años.

    Y al final

    Después de todo lo que les acabo de comentar, creo que si tienen modo de comprarlo a buen precio, vale la pena para unas cuantas horas de acción y tensión en nuestro PS3 o porque no, rentarlo y dedicarle un fin de semana para que logres terminarlo solo o con algún amigo en tu casa.
    Expand
  97. Feb 11, 2014
    0
    Everything that made the FEAR-Series great (namely the FIRST FEAR!), was removed to create this dumbed down piece of random generic "Shooter" for drooling controller-babies.

    - Worse looking Slowmo-Effects than in Fear 2? Check! (even FEAR 2 had bad SlowMo-Effects! Glowing Enemies! WTF?!)
    - Bad, really bad Level-design! The enemy-ai has no room to manouver and flank you or use more
    cover then one piece of cover
    - Regenerating health. Need I say more?
    - annoying Jump"scares" that aren't scary at all
    - a laughable attempt to tell a "story" and interrupt the poor gameplay with boring cutscenes
    - maybe the worst dialogues I've heard in a videogame so far! Extreme embarrassing (Alma is pregnant... so.... whut?!")
    - a shoved in cover-system
    - dumbed down to the core. Combat is no challenge at all!

    If you are a fan of the FEAR-Series, don't waste your money on this piece of casual-crap!
    Expand
  98. Dec 22, 2013
    4
    Nothing special about this game,i think 4 is more than enough.I Played all FEAR games,i have to say the FEAR 1 and 2 are great games and worth playing even in 2013 but FEAR 3 damn so sad game
  99. Nov 14, 2013
    8
    Sound: Decent themes, voice acting is decent, some scenes that add horror sound effects, not as good as previous FEAR games but they were average. 7.

    Graphics: Seen better graphics but they still look great. 8.5.

    Gameplay: The game focuses more on action, but there’s still a good amount of Alma creepiness. It’s on par or probably a little better than FEAR 2, but FEAR 1 still
    takes the cake for horror/intensity. The gunplay is excellent, the guns are great, and the moves are back, oh and did I forget slow-mo. The game gets a rather good difficulty spike near the middle to end portions of the game, and the boss battles are pretty straightforward. The new co-op mode allows the singleplayer to be enjoyed with a friend, although I’d recommend playing solo due to possible different endings based on who’s stats were better, but I’m not so sure about this, because I played solo. 9.

    Story: The story continues from FEAR 2, you play as pointman (FINALLY YES), this is a good thing. He reunites with his brother in spirit form, and you even run into a familiar main character from the second FEAR game. The story wraps up in an excellent ending. 9.5.

    Replay Value: If you plan on investing time into the multiplayer (I didn’t) then purchase, nonetheless the single player is only about 6 hours on normal. Got the game for 5 bucks on steam, great deal for me, but since it was a rent price, the score is effected here, and since there’s not much else besides multiplayer to do in this game. 8.5.

    Overall Score: 8.5 out of 10.
    Expand
Metascore
74

Mixed or average reviews - based on 34 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 20 out of 34
  2. Negative: 0 out of 34
  1. Oct 19, 2011
    80
    The third installment of the Fear series sees the once fresh shooter descending into the mire of modern mainstream gaming, but it is still a fairly compelling play and a fun co-op. [Aug 2011]
  2. Sep 16, 2011
    50
    This game would have been a lot more exciting if it either way genuinely scary or embraces its action parts a lot more. Instead it's stuck in purgatory, as a generic shooter with superficial horror elements.
  3. 70
    Fear 3 is just good shooter – more thriller than horror game. Duels are almost perfect so you'll be satisfied with them even when they are the only contents this game offers. [Issue#207]