videogameblog

F.E.A.R (the one from 2005) is an excellent FPS - probably one of my favorites. The dark atmosphere, particle effects, debris, sound design, intelligent enemy AI and gunplay seperate it from its contemporaries - it's an extremely memorable experience. It was followed by F.E.A.R 2, which doesn't really seem to get what made the original so great; the gunfights don't feel as chaotic or cool. the tone is alot sillier, but it feels like they're still trying to be scary and gritty. Ultimately, it ends up being a pretty forgettable, lesser version of it's predecessor.

Then came F.E.A.R 3, the first game in the series not made by development studio Monolith. Unlike F.E.A.R 2, this game doesn't try to obsessively imitate the identity of the first game. There's areas (like the gameplay) that are clearly attempting to, but it knows it's existence is fucking stupid. Unfortunately, it never commits to actually being over-the-top and dumb. I think it could have been way better if they ditched the baggage of the first two games and just made something entirely new. They still try to make it fit within the lore, which drags it down significantly. You play as 'Point Man' from the first game (They also show his face, which had never been revealed before... he was way cooler when you didn't know he looked like an ugly version of Alan Wake) and if you're playing co-op (which I did), his brother, Paxton Fettel. At least I think they're brothers? and one of them is a ghost? I'm not sure. Apparently in order to understand what the fuck is going on you need to have played the DLC for F.E.A.R 2. It doesn't matter anyway though because I don't think the writers even knew what was going on. The incoherent narrative is somehow still extremely annoying. It makes no sense, but they still insist on pushing it into the gameplay way more than they should. They'll pull you out of gameplay and force you to walk really slowly through some woods, acting as flashbacks(?) to your traumatic childhood. The game also ends with a pretty lengthy sequence where you walk around and confront the memories of your abusive father and 'destroy' them in order to move on. Then you get to go kill him (and he's a weird skin creature for some reason). This narrative thread of confronting trauma would have probably been pretty cool if the story actually made sense at all, everything here is so confusing it's insane. You're bombarded with random names, flashbacks, characters and objectives that never really seem to link. It's clear that they made the levels first and wrote the story afterwards, because the segues between levels are ridiculous. At one point you fall into a lake of blood and then you're suddenly inside an airport.

The level design is nice enough. It pales in comparison to the original game, but it was still nice to fight through environments like supermarkets and airports. I spent alot of time walking around looking at all the different billboards and newspaper clippings, there's a tonne of unique textures in each level. The environmental design never actually had any impact on the gunfights though, most of them are pretty bland shoot-at-eachother sessions. Combat is the area where you can see they're trying to mimic the originals the most, but ultimately end up making yet another lesser version of the first game. You can activate slo-mo, slide kick, drop-kick and all the rest but the physics don't feel as impactful. They try to do the enemy AI strategy thing from the other games too but it's nowhere near as complex and nuanced. You'll hear an enemy go "Shoot the explosive barrel!" and then they won't even do it. It never really gets any deeper than that. They try to introduce a cover mechanic but it's pretty useless, I only found myself using it a handful of times. Enemy variety is pretty good, theres a nice range of different opponents that keep things decently fresh. Gameplay is also insanely easy? I feel like this campaign was not designed with co-op in mind. Me and my friend (FUCK YOU aj) would blow through pretty much every fight with no difficulty. Whoever's playing as Point Man is playing as a soldier and gets to use slo-mo, and the other is playing as Fettel. I'm not 100% sure how he works since I didnt play as him, but I think he has psychic powers and can possess enemies for a short time in order to use their weapons? It's cool that each player gets a different playstyle but Fettel seemed extremely overpowered. Weapon variety is okay, there isn't any standouts that I would seek out (like the pistol in the first game.) The mechs from F.E.A.R 2 are also back, they're still pretty boring to use. Overall it really does just feel like a shittier, less unique version of the first and second games. It concludes with both players stats from throughout the campaign being compared to see who did best, and then their character kills the other. I obviously won because I'm awesome. I thought it was a cool touch to add some competitiveness to the game, it made it feel a little more involved. I can't say I was ever really bored playing F.E.A.R 3, but it definitely made me wish I was playing F.E.A.R instead.

Moral of the story here is to never try and make F.E.A.R again. Nobody has ever been able to do it. This could have been a way cooler game if it wasn't so infatuated with imitating it's clearly superior predecessors. Do your own thing! be yourself!!!