- Summary: Alma returns in F.E.A.R. 3 but this time her sons Point Man and Paxton Fettel introduce divergent co-op, giving players distinctly different abilities affecting their own play as well as the experience of their co-op partner. Gamers participate in single player or co-op modes as Point Man, a genetically enhanced super soldier originally introduced in F.E.A.R., or they can play cooperatively as his conniving brother Paxton Fettel, whose incredible telekinetic power has given him life beyond the grave.… Expand
Jul 27, 201145Unfortunately, F.E.A.R. 3 is a prime example of a game that can't decide what it wants to be. In trying to be an intense horror campaign and an intricate co-op/multiplayer experience at the same time, it winds up being neither and pleasing no one. I see some good ideas in the story and multiplayer modes, but a distinct lack of focus brings it all down.
Definitely a little different than the F.E.A.R we;re used to. The point system and scores for each chapter gives a slight arcade like feel up front, but after the first 2 chapters or so it changes from a negative to a positive. The single player campaign comes off as a typical FPS to start off but the atmosphere and overall creepiness of the game starts to unfold in chapter 3 and is what makes this unique from you typical FPS. The cut scenes between chapters are done very well in my opinion, not so much in looks but in the feel, mainly from Paxton since we don't hear from point man. I am only halfway through but the way the single player is going this could be a superb ending to the F.E.A.R series (although I doubt it will be) I say it could be a good ending due to the slight revamp I feel the series has undergone. The scariness has been diminished slightly due to the fact this is the third time we're getting scared in this fashion, Sure it's a little disappointing when we think of how badly the first game scared us but this is by no means the creators faults, this is our own desensitization, but I feel they knew they couldn't scare us like they used to and worked with that idea to make other aspects better. For example the mulitplayer. The online modes of F.E.A.R 3 are a refreshing take on FPS online games. The modes are hectic, fast paced, and can be played strategically or lazily with no loss of the "fun factor".
I will admit the graphics could be a little better and the campaign has some dull moments, but the ability to play as paxton and the option of co op gives an incentive to play the campaign at least a second time without making it feel like you're playing the campaign over again.… Expand
F.E.A.R. 3 has finally arrived. This game diverges from the basic structure of it's predecessors, with significant changes to the gunplay, atmosphere, graphics, and multiplayer. This isn't terribly surprising, as F.E.A.R. 3 was developed by Day 1 Studios outside of Monolith, the creators of the first two games. It uses a new engine, adopts several modern game mechanics (such as regenerative health, COD like ranking system, cover system), and, perhaps most dramatically, seems to focus more on cooperative play instead of the typical solo nature of the original F.E.A.Rs. I won't lie, my first hour of playtime with this game left me very disappointed. The most immediate flaw in the game is the new engine, which is obviously graphically inferior to Monolith's engine. The crazy bullet effects of the first two games are gone (no more spinning ricochets), and the textures can be downright ugly at times. No, this is a clear departure from the graphically impressive Monolith games, and the gunplay suffers because of it. Everything is more accurate in this game, with unremarkable bullet effects, making the guns feel a little more like COD than FEAR. However... the gunplay still manages to be great fun, with better amputation effects than FEAR 2. The melee system is also different, with a knife attack as your basic melee, instead of the butt of your weapon. The jump kick has been altered as well. No more kung fu flying double jump kicks, more like a boot in the chest. This isn't as bad as it sounds, however. The jump kicks in FEAR 2, while pretty, were almost never used, terribly inaccurate, and just didn't feel like it had much of an impact on the enemies, which isn't the case in FEAR 3. The melee is, well.. better, much better. It's easy to land all of the moves (knife, jump kick, slide kick), and new, melee oriented enemies allow you to actually use these awesome moves quite a bit. Enemies react realistically, flying back, ect. Throw in some bullets, and the FEAR 3 combat system easily excels FEAR 2 in variety and fluidity. It's genuine FUN. Not to mention the fantastic coop and Fettel. 8.5.… Expand
Three minus points are getting discounting, why? well my big complain in the second was that it focused a little bit more in action and forgot a ( not to much, but still) the fear. This time they went to far, is a big risk forgetting about something so important, doesn't the tittle say Fear? well you may ask if the game really show you that, because it really don't do it too much. Also being said, solid shooter,tho, is very smooth ( and similar by any means compared too, ehh you know what FPS game is) anyway, so by any standard , do not play because of the horror genre , play by the solid mechanics. The online , use filters, so you need to pick already in progress competition , also there's a mode similar to the Zombies from Call of Duty Black Ops, only thing that pissed off me, is that ,it doesn't progress you get stuck in the same place fighting hordes and more hordes of creatures, yeah you don't progress but they do, sending more stronger enemies while you're already in the same place. Maybe Fear made good efforts in feeding the fans, but also left fans wanting more scares rather than running and shooting.… Expand
I loved the first two games in the F.E.A.R. franchise. I loved the insane action, slow-motion roundhouse kicks and bodies exploding into Jell-O(tm) when you pumped a shell into them. I loved the freaky-deaky story, the mysterious protagonist(s) and the occasional flirt with enigmatic storytelling, the screeching, violin-falling-down-the-stairs soundtrack that worked in all its beautiful discordance and hair-raising abruptness. The scripted scares wove ladders, hallways, doors and windows into shockingly intricate little spookouts that contrasted with the bombastic shootouts that framed them, and it all just worked out so WELL. Hell, even the ending of the second game was pretty good in my eyes.
And then this thing came out.
I hardly know what to say about it, and I hardly have the energy- even now- to summon a full-blown rant on this marvelous marvelous deconstruction of a once-great shooter franchise. The scares? Gone. The lonesome eeriness? Gone. Hope you like playing co-operatively with your psychic **** brother who has lost all of his charm now that you can see how he works and he's always trotting along beside you like a goddamn doberman. The Half-Life-esque presentation that kept you in the protagonist's perspective constantly and almost never thrust you into immersion-punching cutscenes? Hope you didn't like them, because apparently neither did WB. Did I mention that this game isn't scary?
It gets most of the action from previous titles right, but it's more than lacking in the horror department.
The game called... CALLED... 'Fear'?
It doesn't even try to be scary.
The game should be called A.P.A.T.H.Y.… Expand