Perspective on FEAR 2.

Outstanding. Better than the first. Great scenes, music, diversity of gameplay, interesting AI, etc. Buy it, try it. love it.

Agreed. I've played it 3 times already. Everything about the game looks, soundsand feels right to me, especially now that patches fix letterboxing for 4:3 aspect ratio screens.

I watched some videos that showed drasticly better shadows/lighting on consoles. Apparently PC has no dynamic shadows either.

I watched some videos that showed drasticly better shadows/lighting on consoles. Apparently PC has no dynamic shadows either.

Swiftstrike5

Man, did I ever want to love FEAR 2.

I'm having such a hard time getting into this game. I had saved it for the Easter weekend, intending to play it all the way through in just the four days (which is something I never do). But by the end of the weekend I had only made it to the end of the hospital level. Kind of a disappointing game for me. This game, and Hell's Highway, were two of the biggest disappointments of the year for me.

Oh well, I'm glad you liked it. I'm not finished this game yet, so hopefully it'll pick up somewhere. Too many great games to play.

I beat it in 2 days when I logged on my friends Steam account while he was asleep.

The first FEAR/extraction point were better.

I enjoyed it, but it wasn't as good as the first. AI felt dumbed down a bit, the grenades were rather dull compared to the first as well asthe gore and the melee attacks, no lean kinda bugged me. I thought the story was pretty cool, the ending was good. My major gripe is that there's no mention of the point man or any of the other characters from the first FEAR. Hoping they maybe make an expansion picking up where the firstFEAR left off, and then have a Call of Juarez style third game where you get to play as both the point man and Beckett at different intervals as you progress through the game.

I thought it was really great, and the game looked really nice as well

Here's a more accurate perspective - it ****** sucks.

I only played the demo but is seemed horrible, FEAR 1 was better in just about every way.

I really liked FEAR 2, probably about as much as I liked the original. The story was great, although the AI just didn't seem as smart as it was in the first one. Graphically, it looked better, and I liked being able to carry one more weapon than in the first. Game was spooky as all get out, too. I can't say it was perfect, but it was nice to have a little more variety in the scenery than what was in the first one.

[QUOTE="Swiftstrike5"]

I watched some videos that showed drasticly better shadows/lighting on consoles. Apparently PC has no dynamic shadows either.

blues35301

(PC vs. Console) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLertA4ztEg&feature=related

(Pc Dynamic shadow issues) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OS_0WuoL9Dk&feature=channel_page

(FEAR 1 vs. FEAR 2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbzFfYwhz68&feature=channel_page

Enjoy!

imo, it was almost from a different series than the original. not really scary at all.. i think only twice i actually 'jumped' a little (something making me move and make my mouse shoot up the screen lol)

compared to the original.. where i wanted or even did take breaks because i didnt want to go on :p

it was a pretty good shooter, but if it wasnt for the original, i dont think id be as interested in the series.

[QUOTE="blues35301"][QUOTE="Swiftstrike5"]

I watched some videos that showed drasticly better shadows/lighting on consoles. Apparently PC has no dynamic shadows either.

Swiftstrike5

(PC vs. Console) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLertA4ztEg&feature=related

(Pc Dynamic shadow issues) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OS_0WuoL9Dk&feature=channel_page

(FEAR 1 vs. FEAR 2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbzFfYwhz68&feature=channel_page

Enjoy!

Outstanding. Better than the first. Great scenes, music, diversity of gameplay, interesting AI, etc. Buy it, try it. love it.

Malphal

Oh my god - I've just finished the level in which you've just left the hospital and are advancing through the city after the explosion of the nuclear missile. What an amazing level! Finally this game is starting to show its colors.

I've just reached Wade Elementary School - but I stopped playing because it's late, and I have a feeling... I don't know why... that I'm about to play one of the most sublime levels I've played in quite some time.

Graphically, this game has finally showed itself off. That outdoor level was just completely awe-inspiring. It's possible that I may have completely under-rated this title.

My opinion is that FEAR 2 is too damn short 5h is barely a game. The mp is garbage. The end boss was weak and overall the game was easy.

Seriously?

I loved the first one.

I absolutely hated the second one with a burning passion. Terrible, terrible, terrible!

I watched some videos that showed drasticly better shadows/lighting on consoles. Apparently PC has no dynamic shadows either.

Swiftstrike5

[QUOTE="Cobretti1818"]FEAR - finished 3 times FEAR 2 - Couldn't force myself to finish the demo Monolith should be ashamed of this 'game'.Charles_Dickens

I played through a lot of the game *throws up* and I think it is safe to equate the demo to the full game in this case.

[QUOTE="Swiftstrike5"]

I watched some videos that showed drasticly better shadows/lighting on consoles. Apparently PC has no dynamic shadows either.

MetallicaKings

The outdoor level blew me away! Super clear textures - really, really modern looking. A magnificent engine, really.

(Also, I've just reached Wade Elementary School - does any other part of the game take place outdoors, because the city, after the nuclear explosion, is just wonderful to explore. I also have a feeling that this Wade Elementary School is going to be a great level. It just looks like the developer is going to be sending me on a wild ride here.)

[QUOTE="Charles_Dickens"][QUOTE="Cobretti1818"]FEAR - finished 3 times FEAR 2 - Couldn't force myself to finish the demo Monolith should be ashamed of this 'game'._en1gma_

I played through a lot of the game *throws up* and I think it is safe to equate the demo to the full game in this case.

[QUOTE="_en1gma_"]

[QUOTE="Charles_Dickens"] The first level did nothing for me. But now the game is picking up beautifully. The first outdoor level is superb. It's outrageously fun, and incredibly atmospheric. I don't think that the developer should be ashamed of anything! You really should play the game before you write something like that. A demo is not a good way to judge a game.Charles_Dickens

I played through a lot of the game *throws up* and I think it is safe to equate the demo to the full game in this case.

That's good for you if you are enjoying it. How many games have you played?

[QUOTE="blues35301"][QUOTE="Swiftstrike5"]

(PC vs. Console) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLertA4ztEg&feature=related

(Pc Dynamic shadow issues) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OS_0WuoL9Dk&feature=channel_page

(FEAR 1 vs. FEAR 2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbzFfYwhz68&feature=channel_page

Enjoy!

Swiftstrike5

[QUOTE="Swiftstrike5"]

I watched some videos that showed drasticly better shadows/lighting on consoles. Apparently PC has no dynamic shadows either.

MetallicaKings

Popcorn? Pen and paper for your written apology?

The only thing I "pulled out of my ass" was the no dynamic shadows, but that's because I watched them so long ago. There's an issue with dynamic shadows throughout the game. Sometimes they're there, sometimes they're not there. FEAR 1 vs. FEAR 2 video shows the difference very well.

a decent FPS with an amazing story and ending.

[QUOTE="MetallicaKings"][QUOTE="Swiftstrike5"]

I watched some videos that showed drasticly better shadows/lighting on consoles. Apparently PC has no dynamic shadows either.

Charles_Dickens

The outdoor level blew me away! Super clear textures - really, really modern looking. A magnificent engine, really.

(Also, I've just reached Wade Elementary School - does any other part of the game take place outdoors, because the city, after the nuclear explosion, is just wonderful to explore. I also have a feeling that this Wade Elementary School is going to be a great level. It just looks like the developer is going to be sending me on a wild ride here.)

HAHA that level is my favorite. Without spoiling too much, lets just say you'll be awed when you get to the nurse's office ;)

[QUOTE="Charles_Dickens"]

[QUOTE="MetallicaKings"] lol, please stop pulling #(%* out of your ass. mrbojangles25

The outdoor level blew me away! Super clear textures - really, really modern looking. A magnificent engine, really.

(Also, I've just reached Wade Elementary School - does any other part of the game take place outdoors, because the city, after the nuclear explosion, is just wonderful to explore. I also have a feeling that this Wade Elementary School is going to be a great level. It just looks like the developer is going to be sending me on a wild ride here.)

HAHA that level is my favorite. Without spoiling too much, lets just say you'll be awed when you get to the nurse's office ;)

I've just arrived at the front entrance of Wade Elementary - and I just had a feeling that this was going to be an incredible level. That animation out front, with that massive cloud of dust rising into the sky, is incredibly well done. Super atmospheric. Yeah, wow, does this game ever suck. What lousy graphics - LOL!

Well, it's funny that so many people are saying the first FEAR was so much better.

I bought the original FEAR for ten dollars last week (the platinum edition), and had really only intended to play it after finishing FEAR 2, but being curious I installed it before going to bed last night, and played through the first two levels.

And once again the comments at this forum have left me baffled.

Okay, maybe for its day FEAR was a good game - but by today's standards... and that's all that I care about... today... not yesterday, but today... as a gamer I can't think myself back to five years ago and try to play a game from the perspective of a person who hasn't played all the amazing titles that would be released after FEAR... but by today's standards the graphics are dull, so much so that they took me right out of the game. Anybody who thinks that F.E.A.R. is anywhere NEAR as good looking a game as F.E.A.R. 2 is just completely bananas. And here's the thing: First person shooters are as much about the graphics as they are about the gameplay. Try re-playing the original Half Life, if you don't believe me - by today's standards, it's a complete joke.

But as far as the original game being scary - I have to insert a huge WTF here. The second title is way scarier. And why is that - again, it's largely because of the graphics. The effects that they're using in F.E.A.R. 2 are SO much better than what was used in the original. The truth is that the effects the developer used in the first game are (again, by today's standards) actually kind of cheesy. At one point, when my character had become a sort ghost, and was walking around in slow-mo, I actually did laugh out loud - ooooooh scary!

F.E.A.R. 2 is a great game, and outshines the original in every way.

What we're seeing here is more of the same reasoning people will use when they tell us that Planescape Torment is still a great game - no it's not. By today's standards Planescape is virtually unplayable. I know, because I tried to play it recently. Same thing with the original F.E.A.R. I have no desire whatsoever to play it, and will be removing it from my hard drive later on tonight.

The graphics sucked for a modern shooter, especially a follow up to F.E.A.R. Boring hallway run again to.V4LENT1NE

no mouse button mapping no lean no prone dumbed down graphics dumbed down AI not as scary Items have 'boxes' around them floaty controls letterboxing to name a fewcouly

^ this, totally agree.

F.E.A.R. (1) is superior ;)

One thing I've learned over the years is to follow my instincts - people, I've learned, have an amazing capacity for the truth.

I'll be the first person to admit that I don't have any direct evidence to support this... so, yeah, it's a weak argument... but right now my instincts are telling me that a lot of people posting in this thread haven't actually played F.E.A.R. 2, and are bashing it because they believe that they're supposed to.

People are sheep. They'll say or do almost anything to remain a member of the herd. They're afraid that if they say something 'wrong' then they'll be excommunicated from the herd, and will have to go it alone. You can sort of tell by reading some of the posts above that some of these guys just haven't played the game - I mean, what is it with people? I'm seeing a lot of this at forums, as of late. People just can't wait to get onto a forum and start saying that they hate such and such a game. They're not being critical of the game for the sake of improving the next game in the series by way of offering suggestions - rather, it's just pure hatred. Like they're insecure or something, and need to lash out.

It was over hyped a lot. Its a good way to waste 10 hours though. I did enjoy it but it was nothing special at all. I would recommend any FPS fan to give it a go though.

One thing I've learned over the years is to follow my instincts - people, I've learned, have an amazing capacity for the truth.

I'll be the first person to admit that I don't have any direct evidence to support this... so, yeah, it's a weak argument... but right now my instincts are telling me that a lot of people posting in this thread haven't actually played F.E.A.R. 2, and are bashing it because they believe that they're supposed to.

People are sheep. They'll say or do almost anything to remain a member of the herd. They're afraid that if they say something 'wrong' then they'll be excommunicated from the herd, and will have to go it alone. You can sort of tell by reading some of the posts above that some of these guys just haven't played the game - I mean, what is it with people? I'm seeing a lot of this at forums, as of late. People just can't wait to get onto a forum and start saying that they hate such and such a game. They're not being critical of the game for the sake of improving the next game in the series by way of offering suggestions - rather, it's just pure hatred. Like they're insecure or something, and need to lash out.

Charles_Dickens

Can't deny that F.E.A.R. 2 lacks many many things the original had...oh well.

[QUOTE="Charles_Dickens"]

One thing I've learned over the years is to follow my instincts - people, I've learned, have an amazing capacity for the truth.

I'll be the first person to admit that I don't have any direct evidence to support this... so, yeah, it's a weak argument... but right now my instincts are telling me that a lot of people posting in this thread haven't actually played F.E.A.R. 2, and are bashing it because they believe that they're supposed to.

People are sheep. They'll say or do almost anything to remain a member of the herd. They're afraid that if they say something 'wrong' then they'll be excommunicated from the herd, and will have to go it alone. You can sort of tell by reading some of the posts above that some of these guys just haven't played the game - I mean, what is it with people? I'm seeing a lot of this at forums, as of late. People just can't wait to get onto a forum and start saying that they hate such and such a game. They're not being critical of the game for the sake of improving the next game in the series by way of offering suggestions - rather, it's just pure hatred. Like they're insecure or something, and need to lash out.

OkuLaris

Can't deny that F.E.A.R. 2 lacks many many things the original had...oh well.

You could always... you know... actually write about those things. This IS a forum after all.

EDIT: And I'm sorry, but the lack of a lean button isn't a game-breaker. That's actually laugh out loud funny. Why do I need to lean, when I can slow down time? Ridiculous.

And for those who say that this game isn't scary - I need concrete examples. There have been times when I've been scared witless. If you want to discuss, in detail the level which takes place at Wade Elementary, then I'm open for that debate. I would LOVE to argue with anybody who thinks that this level isn't one of the best levels we've seen in an FPS.

[QUOTE="OkuLaris"]

[QUOTE="Charles_Dickens"]

One thing I've learned over the years is to follow my instincts - people, I've learned, have an amazing capacity for the truth.

I'll be the first person to admit that I don't have any direct evidence to support this... so, yeah, it's a weak argument... but right now my instincts are telling me that a lot of people posting in this thread haven't actually played F.E.A.R. 2, and are bashing it because they believe that they're supposed to.

People are sheep. They'll say or do almost anything to remain a member of the herd. They're afraid that if they say something 'wrong' then they'll be excommunicated from the herd, and will have to go it alone. You can sort of tell by reading some of the posts above that some of these guys just haven't played the game - I mean, what is it with people? I'm seeing a lot of this at forums, as of late. People just can't wait to get onto a forum and start saying that they hate such and such a game. They're not being critical of the game for the sake of improving the next game in the series by way of offering suggestions - rather, it's just pure hatred. Like they're insecure or something, and need to lash out.

Charles_Dickens

Can't deny that F.E.A.R. 2 lacks many many things the original had...oh well.

You could always... you know... actually write about those things. This IS a forum after all.

EDIT: And I'm sorry, but the lack of a lean button isn't a game-breaker. That's actually laugh out loud funny. Why do I need to lean, when I can slow down time? Ridiculous.

And for those who say that this game isn't scary - I need concrete examples. There have been times when I've been scared witless. If you want to discuss, in detail the level which takes place at Wade Elementary, then I'm open for that debate. I would LOVE to argue with anybody who thinks that this level isn't one of the best levels we've seen in an FPS.

Well, it's funny that so many people are saying the first FEAR was so much better.

I bought the original FEAR for ten dollars last week (the platinum edition), and had really only intended to play it after finishing FEAR 2, but being curious I installed it before going to bed last night, and played through the first two levels.

And once again the comments at this forum have left me baffled.

Okay, maybe for its day FEAR was a good game - but by today's standards... and that's all that I care about... today... not yesterday, but today... as a gamer I can't think myself back to five years ago and try to play a game from the perspective of a person who hasn't played all the amazing titles that would be released after FEAR... but by today's standards the graphics are dull, so much so that they took me right out of the game. Anybody who thinks that F.E.A.R. is anywhere NEAR as good looking a gameas F.E.A.R. 2 is just completely bananas. And here's the thing: First person shooters are as much about the graphics as they are about the gameplay. Try re-playing the original Half Life, if you don't believe me - by today's standards, it's a complete joke.

But as far as the original game being scary - I have to insert a huge WTF here. The second title is way scarier. And why is that - again, it's largely because of the graphics. The effects that they're using in F.E.A.R. 2 are SO much better than what was used in the original. The truth is that the effects the developer used in the first game are (again, by today's standards) actually kind of cheesy. At one point, when my character had become a sort ghost, and was walking around in slow-mo, I actually did laugh out loud - ooooooh scary!

F.E.A.R. 2 is a great game, and outshines the original in every way.

What we're seeing here is more of the same reasoning people will use when they tell us that Planescape Torment is still a great game - no it's not. By today's standards Planescape is virtually unplayable. I know, because I tried to play it recently. Same thing with the original F.E.A.R. I have no desire whatsoever to play it, and will be removing it from my hard drive later on tonight.

Charles_Dickens

No offense, but this post represents all that is wrong with multi-platform gaming. It's quite sad, actually. :|

Hmm, interesting. Everybody's quick to talk generalities, and say bad things about F.E.A.R. 2 ("Dude, the game just sucks). But when I ask for specifics nobody wants to engage in debate. So, Wade Elementary. What was it about this level that didn't work for you? I'd LOVE to hear it.Charles_Dickens

I don't remember anyone saying it sucked. They're saying it's not that good compared to FEAR 1, which is quite true. FEAR 1 had an amazing atmosphere backed by full dynamic shadows and decent AI.

FEAR 2 wasn't quite as good because the developer failed to port the game. They used 'film grain' to cover up the below average, plastic, graphics and the game lacks the same dynamic shadows as the original (there are some). The AI in FEAR 2 felt like it'd just rush you. They'd come one at a time and you simply pop them off as they ran by.

I certainly wouldn't pay $50 for it and for one reason; I don't support sloppy developers. If they want to port a console game then it should be just as good or better on PC. If they can't pull that off then they don't deserve my money.

One thing I've learned over the years is to follow my instincts - people, I've learned, have an amazing capacity for the truth.

I'll be the first person to admit that I don't have any direct evidence to support this... so, yeah, it's a weak argument... but right now my instincts are telling me that a lot of people posting in this thread haven't actually played F.E.A.R. 2, and are bashing it because they believe that they're supposed to.

People are sheep. They'll say or do almost anything to remain a member of the herd. They're afraid that if they say something 'wrong' then they'll be excommunicated from the herd, and will have to go it alone. You can sort of tell by reading some of the posts above that some of these guys just haven't played the game - I mean, what is it with people? I'm seeing a lot of this at forums, as of late. People just can't wait to get onto a forum and start saying that they hate such and such a game. They're not being critical of the game for the sake of improving the next game in the series by way of offering suggestions - rather, it's just pure hatred. Like they're insecure or something, and need to lash out.

Charles_Dickens

You're a weird man, Mr. Dickens.

I can also say you hate Crysis and never played it, because no man in his right mind can praise FEAR 2's graphics and bash Crysis.

Or I can say that you haven't played the original FEAR, that's why you laugh at us for pointing out that lean was removed (also keep in mind that the original had lean on consoles, and KZ2 has a cover system that is miles above turning furniture upside down and wasting precious seconds while doing it).

Here's a review that points out what's wrong with FEAR 2.

As he says, none of the changes or additions to the game are awful, but the cumulative effect is horrible. I have to add that the game feels EXTREMELY disjointed. There's a shooty section, there's a robot section, there's the spooky section, there's the section where you're locked in a confined space and only fight one enemy type... and the same pattern is repeated through the entire game.

(also, the ending is the biggest lolocaust in gaming history)

My biggest problem with F.E.A.R. 2 is the combat. F.E.A.R. 1 had, and still has in my opinion, the most visceral, in your face, adrenaline running, combat sequences of any first person shooter. F.E.A.R. 2 slowed down the pace tremendously which really sucked a lot of life from the combat. The weapons are undeniably less satisfying, remember the F.E.A.R. 1 Shotgun anyone? Lack of lean is lame as well. Like that one review posted above mentioned, there's a bunch of minor things that were added or removed from F.E.A.R. 2 that add up and really make this an unworthy sequel to F.E.A.R. 1.

[QUOTE="Charles_Dickens"]

One thing I've learned over the years is to follow my instincts - people, I've learned, have an amazing capacity for the truth.

I'll be the first person to admit that I don't have any direct evidence to support this... so, yeah, it's a weak argument... but right now my instincts are telling me that a lot of people posting in this thread haven't actually played F.E.A.R. 2, and are bashing it because they believe that they're supposed to.

People are sheep. They'll say or do almost anything to remain a member of the herd. They're afraid that if they say something 'wrong' then they'll be excommunicated from the herd, and will have to go it alone. You can sort of tell by reading some of the posts above that some of these guys just haven't played the game - I mean, what is it with people? I'm seeing a lot of this at forums, as of late. People just can't wait to get onto a forum and start saying that they hate such and such a game. They're not being critical of the game for the sake of improving the next game in the series by way of offering suggestions - rather, it's just pure hatred. Like they're insecure or something, and need to lash out.

Baranga

You're a weird man, Mr. Dickens.

I can also say you hate Crysis and never played it, because no man in his right mind can praise FEAR 2's graphics and bash Crysis.

Or I can say that you haven't played the original FEAR, that's why you laugh at us for pointing out that lean was removed (also keep in mind that the original had lean on consoles, and KZ2 has a cover system that is miles above turning furniture upside down and wasting precious seconds while doing it).

Here's a review that points out what's wrong with FEAR 2.

As he says, none of the changes or additions to the game are awful, but the cumulative effect is horrible. I have to add that the game feels EXTREMELY disjointed. There's a shooty section, there's a robot section, there's the spooky section, there's the section where you're locked in a confined space and only fight one enemy type... and the same pattern is repeated through the entire game.

(also, the ending is the biggest lolocaust in gaming history)

I guess I'll type up my thoughts on the game.

Absence of clone soldiers for a good part of the game. Does anyone disagree that the clone soldiers are the greatest FPS enemies since the Half-Life marines? I hope not. Fighting the clones in F.E.A.R. is F.E.A.R. Them not introducing the clones until about a quarter to a third of the way through the game was a mistake. Obviously a reaction to the complaints that the original had too few enemy types, they give us the same AI in a much, much less enjoyable form for a sizable chunk of the game. Not a great idea.

Slow motion doesn't slow down as much. This is perhaps subtle, but it pissed me off immediately. Watching bullets fly through the air and seeing the awesome way clones died was, well, awesome in F.E.A.R. In F.E.A.R.2, the reduced speed reduction immediately makes everything less cool. There was no good reason to speed it up. Just bad reasons... though I have no idea what those reasons were. Don't fix what isn't broken.

Generally awful weapon sounds.

The AI isn'tan improvement on the original's. Granted, that's not such a bad thing, given that the original's AI is awesome. That makes F.E.A.R.2's AI awesome, too. But it's hard to be blown away by the same thing twice, especially when the first game is from 2005. F.E.A.R.2's AI is probably jointly still the best corridor shooter AI out there, but it simply should be better. Sequels are inherently supposed to improve on their predecessors. Unless you work at EA or Activision.

A bad story even by FPS standards. F.E.A.R.'s story is badly presented, but it's a pretty awesome concept. F.E.A.R.2's story doesn't try to do anything new. Besides the end scene, which makes me groan but I like on the whole, the story just doesn't do anything unexpected or interesting. And the text logs? Awful idea. Like F.E.A.R.'s phone calls, they were boring, but having to stop and read them? Ugh. Why not just give us audio logs and let us listen to them as we move throughout the game. They could easily work the level design so we don't run into anything while we're listening to them, and they could, y'know, hire writers next time. I'm not against reading (I spend more time reading than anything else I do), but there's no good reason for text logs in F.E.A.R.2.

No dual wielding of pistols. Give me one reasonable justification for this omission and I will repent in full and praise F.E.A.R.2. as the "great" FPS it apparently is.

F.E.A.R.2 is short. Like, really short. Five hours short. I'm fine with short games, when they make up for it. Games like Portal and Escape from Butcher Bay are both short FPS games (though EfBB is longer than F.E.A.R.2 by a couple of hours) but they both also make up for it by providing fresh, dynamic or generally excellent experiences. What does F.E.A.R.2 have? A bunch of identical, interchangable firefights. Pfft.

The visuals are pretty good. It's obvious as you play it that you're playing on an engine from 2005, and the fact that it's a corridor shooter makes that all the worse. Sure, it looks better than F.E.A.R., but it looks half as good as it could if they wanted to market the game to PC gamers. Which they don't. Compared to games like Crysis and S.T.A.L.K.E.R CS and Cryostasis, it's glaringly obvious that this is now a console engine.

Speaking of consoles, can't map the mouse/keyboard properly and it uses a checkpoint save system. What's next - a RROD?

The horror is stale, just like in F.E.A.R. Anyone can startle anyone else simply by shouting BOO! and that's all F.E.A.R. does, and that's all F.E.A.R.2 does. They're both equally as bad as each other.

Great music, but much of it is lifted directly from the original, so no surprises there.

All in all, it's a decent game. The gunplay is decent, the music is great, the visuals are good, the atmosphere is okay, the horror is stale. It's got nothing on F.E.A.R., but, as I said in an earlier post, on its own merits, it's pretty okay.

I guess I'll type up my thoughts on the game.

Absence of clone soldiers for a good part of the game. Does anyone disagree that the clone soldiers are the greatest FPS enemies since the Half-Life marines? I hope not. Fighting the clones in F.E.A.R. is F.E.A.R. Them not introducing the clones until about a quarter to a third of the way through the game was a mistake. Obviously a reaction to the complaints that the original had too few enemy types, they give us the same AI in a much, much less enjoyable form for a sizable chunk of the game. Not a great idea.

Slow motion doesn't slow down as much. This is perhaps subtle, but it pissed me off immediately. Watching bullets fly through the air and seeing the awesome way clones died was, well, awesome in F.E.A.R. In F.E.A.R.2, the reduced speed reduction immediately makes everything less cool. There was no good reason to speed it up. Just bad reasons... though I have no idea what those reasons were. Don't fix what isn't broken.

Generally awful weapon sounds.

The AI isn'tan improvement on the original's. Granted, that's not such a bad thing, given that the original's AI is awesome. That makes F.E.A.R.2's AI awesome, too. But it's hard to be blown away by the same thing twice, especially when the first game is from 2005. F.E.A.R.2's AI is probably jointly still the best corridor shooter AI out there, but it simply should be better. Sequels are inherently supposed to improve on their predecessors. Unless you work at EA or Activision.

A bad story even by FPS standards. F.E.A.R.'s story is badly presented, but it's a pretty awesome concept. F.E.A.R.2's story doesn't try to do anything new. Besides the end scene, which makes me groan but I like on the whole, the story just doesn't do anything unexpected or interesting. And the text logs? Awful idea. Like F.E.A.R.'s phone calls, they were boring, but having to stop and read them? Ugh. Why not just give us audio logs and let us listen to them as we move throughout the game. They could easily work the level design so we don't run into anything while we're listening to them, and they could, y'know, hire writers next time. I'm not against reading (I spend more time reading than anything else I do), but there's no good reason for text logs in F.E.A.R.2.

No dual wielding of pistols. Give me one reasonable justification for this omission and I will repent in full and praise F.E.A.R.2. as the "great" FPS it apparently is.

F.E.A.R.2 is short. Like, really short. Five hours short. I'm fine with short games, when they make up for it. Games like Portal and Escape from Butcher Bay are both short FPS games (though EfBB is longer than F.E.A.R.2 by a couple of hours) but they both also make up for it by providing fresh, dynamic or generally excellent experiences. What does F.E.A.R.2 have? A bunch of identical, interchangable firefights. Pfft.

The visuals are pretty good. It's obvious as you play it that you're playing on an engine from 2005, and the fact that it's a corridor shooter makes that all the worse. Sure, it looks better than F.E.A.R., but it looks half as good as it could if they wanted to market the game to PC gamers. Which they don't. Compared to games like Crysis and S.T.A.L.K.E.R CS and Cryostasis, it's glaringly obvious that this is now a console engine.

Speaking of consoles, can't map the mouse/keyboard properly and it uses a checkpoint save system. What's next - a RROD?

The horror is stale, just like in F.E.A.R. Anyone can startle anyone else simply by shouting BOO! and that's all F.E.A.R. does, and that's all F.E.A.R.2 does. They're both equally as bad as each other.

Great music, but much of it is lifted directly from the original, so no surprises there.

All in all, it's a decent game. The gunplay is decent, the music is great, the visuals are good, the atmosphere is okay, the horror is stale. It's got nothing on F.E.A.R., but, as I said in an earlier post, on its own merits, it's pretty okay.

parasitesingle