Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

On F.E.A.R. 2 Performance

There's an article on 3D Performance with F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin on FiringSquad (thanks Ant) and an article on F.E.A.R. 2 Gameplay Performance and IQ on [H] Enthusiast (thanks Voodoo Extreme), each to help you evaluate whether or not you should f.e.a.r. running Monolith's shooter sequel on your system.

View
16 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >

16. Re: On F.E.A.R. 2 Performance Feb 24, 2009, 22:58 Creston
 
In many respects it reminds me of Prey... lots of potential but not fully realised.

FEAR2 is approximately 198,000 times better than the fucking shitfest that was Prey. Prey had an awesome demo, sold me on the game. Too bad the demo, which was the first hour of the game, was the only part of the game worth playing.

God that game sucked.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15. Re: On F.E.A.R. 2 Performance Feb 24, 2009, 16:46 Enahs
 
Demo's FTW. Gameplay and performance check before buying the game!  
Avatar 15513
 
I am free of all prejudice. I hate everyone equally.
- W. C. Fields
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
14. Re: On F.E.A.R. 2 Performance Feb 24, 2009, 14:51 Ant
 
InBlack: Why did you hate Crysis? I heard way more complaints for Far Cry 2. I enjoyed Far Cry 1. I know AI sucks, but it's still fun.  
Avatar 1957
 
Ant @ The Ant Farm: http://antfarm.ma.cx and Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net ...
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
13. Re: On F.E.A.R. 2 Performance Feb 24, 2009, 13:42 4D-Boxing
 
InBlack

Taste is subjective so I have no issues with your comments.

If you hated Crysis that much I can just imagine you're take on CoD4 or ever worst Far Cry2.

Thank god COD4 single player was very short 4 hours max cause it was far from Great IMHO but most would probably disagree. I have to admit that CoD4 was 100X more fun online despite having the worst spawn system ever. ..in DM you just need to double back & buddy will respawn close to where he got fragged.

..now back on topic...80 to 85 score is low considering the impact the original game had. Eventhough it has no bug issues it seems to be a clear sky type debacle. Online is weak & single player has to be completed on hard to be any fun.

My worst purchases... GEARS PC, Far Cry 2...
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
12. Re: On F.E.A.R. 2 Performance Feb 24, 2009, 13:34 theyarecomingforyou
 
I liked Prey. It felt very fresh compared to all the pseudorealistic military shooters out there.
Yeah, me to. What I was getting at was that it did something different and was quite polished but lacked the "wow" factor to make it a classic. There was more potential than was realised. In the case of Prey it was the chronic cliches and bad AI that let it down, something present in FEAR2.
 
Avatar 22891
 
SteamID: theyarecomingforyou
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
11. Re: On F.E.A.R. 2 Performance Feb 24, 2009, 12:00 Jerykk
 
In many respects it reminds me of Prey... lots of potential but not fully realised.

I liked Prey. It felt very fresh compared to all the pseudorealistic military shooters out there. Reminded me of 90's shooters.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10. Re: On F.E.A.R. 2 Performance Feb 24, 2009, 10:01 theyarecomingforyou
 
Well if Crysis is more fun than this, than its now definite, a pass. Crysis is probably my *worst* buy of 2008.
The original Crysis? That was pretty weak - the glowing reviews were WELL off base, imo - but I thought Crysis Warhead was much better... not great but a relatively decent shooter. Ironically, the reviews were much more negative.

I don't put any faith in reviews myself, though usually I'll check them out anyway. Often I'll check out the Metacritic rating to get a rough idea of the quality but I don't rely on it.
 
Avatar 22891
 
SteamID: theyarecomingforyou
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
9. Re: On F.E.A.R. 2 Performance Feb 24, 2009, 09:44 InBlack
 
Well if Crysis is more fun than this, than its now definite, a pass. Crysis is probably my *worst* buy of 2008.

Man i hated that game.
 
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
8. Re: On F.E.A.R. 2 Performance Feb 24, 2009, 09:38 Ant
 
I played the demo. It wasn't bad. Much prettier and stuff. However, the game is pretty much the same. Due to lack of free time and have many old games (e.g., Crysis -- much funner and prettier), I won't be playing the full game.  
Avatar 1957
 
Ant @ The Ant Farm: http://antfarm.ma.cx and Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net ...
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
7. Re: On F.E.A.R. 2 Performance Feb 24, 2009, 08:39 InBlack
 
Whats really interesting is that on some private blogs, people are rating the game very high....*sigh*

Man game journalism is nowhere near the mark, it set in the 90's. Man I remember PC Gamer rating Starcraft Brood War with 76%.

A BLIZZARD GAME AT 76%! Can you believe it? I remember reading that review and agreeing with most of the objections and shortcomings that it listed.

These days, I usually either try the game beforehand or go with trusted developers (and those are few and far between)
 
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
6. Re: On F.E.A.R. 2 Performance Feb 24, 2009, 07:20 theyarecomingforyou
 
This game got around 60-70% on the major gaming sites.
Most of the reviews I've seen put it around the 80-85% mark, with a Metacritic rating of 81. Pretty low for a big sequel. Most of the criticism is not of it being a bad game but of it not doing anything particularly new. And most of the user criticism I've seen is of the scare moments not being scary - STALKER SoC did a MUCH better job in that department.

I may pick up FEAR 2 at some point, as the demo was enjoyable if not anything new. I think it's really just a case of tempering your expectations. In many respects it reminds me of Prey... lots of potential but not fully realised. Not bad but not great.

Oh, and performance seems very good. Quite interesting to see the benchmarks.
 
Avatar 22891
 
SteamID: theyarecomingforyou
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
5. Re: On F.E.A.R. 2 Performance Feb 24, 2009, 04:49 InBlack
 
This game got around 60-70% on the major gaming sites. On the smaller less dev-ass-licking sites it scored even less.

Pass. Thank you very much Monolith.
 
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
4. Re: On F.E.A.R. 2 Performance Feb 24, 2009, 03:40 Caveman
 
There's a few places where your shadow just randomly dissappears, it's a very small bug and hardly noticable unless you look out for it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNg3HS69UFc

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
3. Re: On F.E.A.R. 2 Performance Feb 24, 2009, 02:57 Creston
 
What shadow bugs? No bugs here?

Runs at everything max on an 8800GT, smooth as silk.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
2. Re: On F.E.A.R. 2 Performance Feb 24, 2009, 02:29 Caveman
 
Yea, besides the shadow bugs it's a beauty.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
1. Re: On F.E.A.R. 2 Performance Feb 24, 2009, 02:28 Aero
 
Runs great over here and I'm running a pretty modest system--at least in terms of gaming PCs (e8500, 9800GTX). It's one of those ever so satisfying experiences where you just crank all of the details way up and never think about it again. If there is one thing I hate, it's having to spend my first hour with a game fiddling with detail settings to get the right balance.

FEAR2 is a good looking game. Not very fancy, and it really could have benefited from better lighting/shadowing effects, but all things considered it's a nice looking game.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
16 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo