Quote Originally Posted by Bolivar View Post
Literal LMFAO on that Alma having kids picture caption.

Pretty much my thoughts exactly. Fear 3 did justice to the Tactical shooter roots but did nothing for the canon. The multiplayer had fresh ideas but the series lends itself better to the classic Counter-Strike, Call of Duty competitive experience IMO (which they dropped). Bringing John Carpenter in helped with atmosphere some but it just wasn't scary. If you ever get a chance to play co-op I do recommend it though.

The reason why Day 1 did this game is because WB gave Monolith creative control over the Lord of the Rings IP. I'm hoping once they finish on Shadow of Mordor they make the REAL next-gen successor to FEAR 2. Hopefully even go the route of Twisted Metal Head On or Ys IV, replacing the games by other teams in the canon. If you haven't played it, I recommend checking out the FEAR 2 single player DLC Reborn. Not only is it a really well-done action sequence, but it sets up the original idea for FEAR 3 that I think would've worked better.
I was just reading up on Reborn today. I was wondering how Fettel came back. I'm a little reluctant to pick it up in fear that I'll just hate F.E.A.R. 3 more for not being whatever Reborn was building up to. Like when I saw the ending of Command & Conquer Firestorm and went to Tiberirum Wars

And I hope Monolith picks it up again. I'm hoping if F.E.A.R. Online does bomb it won't be so bad that the WB drops the franchise altogether.

Quote Originally Posted by Psychotic View Post
I can't ever imagine playing this game solo being fun because it's designed for co-op. As a co-op experience it's a blast and you can have a laugh. It's never going to be gaming's Citizen Kane but then it doesn't need to. As a shooter the gameplay is solid and there's a good variety in enemies and situations.

In terms of horror, nothing will make you yell, but likewise I do think the Supermarket/DIY store and the bridge train bus thing with the lickers in were good at creating an unsettling "what's going to happen" atmosphere, although there wasn't really a payoff.

I note your review focuses a lot on the story from a fan of the series in general. When myself and DK played it we had no conception of the story and didn't really pay attention at all. There's a mute Solid Snake and his ghost brother and they're fighting robots and weirdos and taking over giant mechs just 'cause. Plus there's some woman called Alma or something? Who knows? Who cares? I'm a ghost!

The multiplayer sections were also pretty cool. This, for me, is really where the horror is. Generic Horde mode with base building elements is decent enough, but the added danger of "OH trout IT'S ALMA DON'T LOOK AT ALMA!" as a little girl wanders about is a good addition and the horror - if one can call it that - is the feeling of dread that at any moment all your hard work is going to be undone because you glimpsed at this random enemy that can pop up anywhere, at any time, and you can't fight them or stop them.
Yeah, if you have no collection of the older games I can see how you guys enjoyed this. But your post just solidifies to me why this is a bad sequel. The gameplay wasn't that terribly different to Project Origin except for being refined in certain places and if you experienced the story campaign in the first game you may be able to see why I and a lot of other people found the third underwhelming. Needless to say there's a reason Alma Wade is my mascot. On the plus side at least 3 did away with the QTEs 2 introduced. I didn't care how it always took forever to reload when I was out, though. Funny how I only remember these things after I finish the review. I need to learn to take notes.

Alma was the only good thing about the online multiplayer. The rest of it with the wave and wave of enemies was just boring to me. I find it sad how Alma feels more like herself there than the story campaign.

And smurf the Scavengers! Those four-legged walking trout for brains can go die in a fire!