[QUOTE="ASK_Story"] Here's a fair review from a guy who never played previous FEARs.
http://www.gamerankings.com/itemrankings/launchreview.asp?reviewid=823836
He gave it a high 7, close to a 8. So it's a good game regardless. If people played the original and exp. pack to death, then PM won't probably offer much. But FEAR fans will like it no matter what.
TOO MUCH TIME ON MY HANDS_Russell
That review is rather poor in my opinion. Illogical and irrational conclusions left and right.
"It's called a 'stand-alone expansion pack' for the principle reason that it doesn't need any previous installations of a F.E.A.R. title to be present on your machine, which naturally begs the question as to why it is referred to as any kind of expansion pack at all."
...This sentence is so screwy I was sure I read it wrong at first. In one sentence, he contradicts himself with two different mentalities. He acknowledges that it doesn't need the original game to be played because it's a standalone expansion, then questions why it is not considered a sequel presumably because he thinks that games not needing the original to be played must be sequels, even though he just explained otherwise.
"In other words, why isn't it just considered a sequel to the original F.E.A.R. game?"
1. Standalone. Expansion. Pack. Durka, durka.
2. Because it's hardly related to the preceding FEAR games, which could only remain unknown if you have never played them.
"You've probably inferred from the above that I never played any preceding F.E.A.R. game(s), and you're right... ...This admittedly could be considered a detriment to reviewing what amounts to a sequel..."
It could if it did indeed amount to a sequel, but it doesn't, which you don't know because you haven't played the original. Thus does the act of not playing the original prove the detrimentality of itself, by itself.
"...but I contend that someone that never saw the first Shrek could still credibly and accurately state that the third in the series is a completely terrible movie. If you disagree (not about Shrek, mind you, but about whether or note I can possibly have anything pertinent to share about Perseus Mandate), look up in the upper right corner of this window for a red box with a white X in it. Click on it."
Hey, what can I say, I was bored.
"I shot the rats instead. What an immensely gratifying mist of blood..."
"The only part of the overall package that I could have done without was the language. Grenades are one thing - my kid (who is just vindictive enough to enjoy watching Daddy get blown up over and over and over...) is used to that kind of stuff. The rampant F-bombs, on the other hand, well... that gets old. Yes, there's a Mature 17+ label right on the box, so it's not like I wasn't warned. It's just that it doesn't add much to the game, in my opinion, and really isn't necessary."
So, in his opinion, explicit language >>> some of the most exorbitant gore you'll ever see in a game. Right.
Anyway, there were various other little things about the review I didn't like, but those were the major things. Getting away from those criticisms, his review and score are from someone who hasn't played the original games, which means only a small target audience is going to be in agreement with him. Even then, I find it hard to believe many even of that audience would agree with him due to the game havinglow production values out the ass, leaving what would be a poor impression upon them.
I personally will get the game anyway eventually because I was mildly entertained by the demo, it's just that it was a very watered-down and convoluted kind of entertained from FEAR and Extraction Point. I'd be surprised if I considered it more than a 6.5 by Gamespot's rating system.
Log in to comment