Just some random thoughts on F.E.A.R.

[Todd33]

They should have licensed the Source engine. Their engine is very slow. It looks about the same as HL2 (textures not as good though), the physics are crap though. I know they save money making their own, but they will lose sales based on the heavy specs. I doubt FEAR scales as well to the low end too. HL2 runs at least twice as fast while looking the same, that says something for the Source engine. No widescreen support from the menus, you have to edit a config file, what is this 1999?

I saw buckets and things wobbling on tables, blood drops falling onto bodies making them jump off the floor, boxes shoot out sideways when I walked past/over them. All the small things seems to have no mass. It reminds me of Doom III physics, maybe worse.

Still a great game, the story and atmosphere is top notch so far.

 

[MX2]

I dont like the sounds when you end up kicking a bucket or box off the shelf or alongside you. Sounds horrible

 

[Kogan]

The physics don't seem that bad to me. I always thought the boxes flying off the shelves quickly was a ghost or something.. maybe I'm wrong

I also really hate that there's not an easier way to change resolutions.. Hopefully they'll fix this in a patch or something (the 1.01 patch doesn't fix it).

And I think it should play pretty well on a low-end computer when all the graphics options are turned down. I get over 200fps on my 6800nu when everything is turned down/off (although it looks more like half life 1 at that point).

 

[SynthDude2001]

Originally posted by: Todd33
They should have licensed the Source engine. Their engine is very slow. It looks about the same as HL2 (textures not as good though), the physics are crap though. I know they save money making their own, but they will lose sales based on the heavy specs. I doubt FEAR scales as well to the low end too. HL2 runs at least twice as fast while looking the same, that says something for the Source engine. No widescreen support from the menus, you have to edit a config file, what is this 1999?

The speed thing is mainly what worries me. I've heard a lot of good things about FEAR though as far as story and gameplay, so I do want to pick it up at some point. But if I'm going to have to turn down all the graphical settings (and/or turn down my resolution) just so I can have it play smoothly, especially if it doesn't look that much better than anything currently out there to begin with, then I don't think it'll be worth it for me until I can get the "full experience", so to speak.

I still have to play the demos though to see what they're like - anyone know how the full version runs compared to the demos?

Edit: It's also disappointing that they seem to make you edit the config files manually to use a widescreen resolution (it's not like these sub-$400 Dell 2005FPW monitors aren't mainstream these days...), but overall it's not that big of a deal. As long as you can set the resolution you want, and the FOV actually matches the aspect ratio (instead of just stretching things), that's good enough for me.

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: Todd33
It reminds me of Doom III physics, maybe worse.

I havn't played FEAR yet, but you realize Doom3 had great physics? That is why they added the physics grab gun in the expansion and that was why multiple mods demonstrated Doom3s physics by removing dissapearing bodies and throwing them all over the place. With the grab gun you could literally grab projectiles out of mid air and throw them back and they responded very fluidly. *shrug*

 

[Koudelka]

I really wish these kind of threads would just be deleted upon creation.

Many, many games have been coming out where top notch hardware still wouldnt play games at max as soon as they were released. ie. Doom3 and Everquest II.

Everquest II did this on purpose, so as technology gets better, Everquest II will continue to look better.

You just need to find a happy medium with the graphical settings.

If FEAR used the Source engine, i probably wouldnt have even bought it. The Source engine isnt very impressive, aside from the fact that low end users can max out options. The ragdoll physics were about the only thing that impressed me.

What irks me, are the thousands of people complaining and crying because they cant max out options. Many games were released like this. I cringe when i remember the loading times for Doom3 when it came out.

 

[Todd33]

Thanks for your forum Nazi views Koudelka, glad you are not a mod.

I never complained the game didn't run at max at 100fps. I tried 1600x1200 2x AA with mostly med settings and it was averaging maybe 30-40fps. These setting in HL would yield 100fps easy. HL2 looks as good or better than FEAR IMO and the physics are a lot better.

Everquest 2 was not designed for the future, the game is just poorly coded and you bought their PR. The game runs like crap and looks average at best.

 

[PrayForDeath]

FEAR's graphics look way better to me than HL2's. The lighting, bump/specular mapping, textures, particles, everything. And the physics aren't that bad (IMO). I am glad they made their own engine rather than license one of the popular engines out, so we don't get the biased benches (D3 vs HL2).

 

[gorcorps]

I think FEAR looks better at medium (where I'm stuck at) than HL2 at high. If I had the equipment FEAR would look a lot better. The physics in HL2 were better, but they flushed those out a lot and made it a huge part of the game where FEAR just kinda tacked it on so the explosings looked more violent than they actually are . AI in FEAR isn't perfect but still a lot better than any shooter I've played.

 

[NiKeFiDO]

they were gonna use Source engine, but they wanted to change so many things they decided to do there own. according to IGN I think (I read it somewhere)

 

[Homerboy]

I dont recall anyone bitching when id released GLQuake and only a handful of people had a voodoo card to run it on....
The effects in FEAR are required to increase the game play. The smoke/dust clouding a room during a heavy firefight from bullets hitting concrete walls and floors, fire extinguishers etc add difficult and tactics to the fight.

If you have to bump down your settings so be it. You'd complain again when you got the new Nvidia 8xxx and FEAR's expansion pack didn't push your equipment...

 

[Oakenfold]

Honestly I like the engine, I think they have an innovative product, could they have used source? Sure, would it be the same outcome? Maybe not. Granted I agree that HL2 physics are much more intuitive. I think the graphics are better in some aspects than HL2 while others they are not. I don't understand what you mean about the engine being slow though, your system should handle the game just fine, runs like butter for me, be specific. Edited- I see you are comparing to HL2 source, I'll have to see what FPS I have at those settings as I never finished HL2 due to a loss of interest. The config thing is annoying but anyone ever hear of a game called BF2?

I disagree with the OP's statement about EQ2, it is by far the best looking recent mmorpg on the market.

 

[Dethfrumbelo]

The least impressive thing about of FEAR is the graphics and how poorly the engine is coded. HL2 and DOOM have better graphics and faster engines, period.

That said, I think FEAR is superior to either of those two games soley because of its excellent gameplay and AI. Gameplay trumps pretty graphics any day.

 

[Schadenfroh]

This game an OpenGL title?

 

[shortylickens]

Remember, even if they licensed out the Source graphics engine, they would still need a license for the Havok Physics engine.

Maybe they didnt want to spend the money.

 

[hans030390]

last time i checked...FEAR looked far superior to HL2. The textures are better, the lighting is better, etc etc. It's no wonder it doesnt run "well"...though it runs really well for me, so i dont know what you're talking about.

Source engine on FEAR would make it not as good.

 

[Todd33]

Whenever people complain about a sluggish engine some yahoo has to come back with "it runs fine on my system". hans030390, look at our two systems and get back to me on how well you think it runs. I disagree that FEAR has better textures than HL2. I noticed running outside in the street levels how drab the walls and ground were, I fired up HL2 the other day and the buildings looked much better IMO. In the end they both use DX9 effects, maybe with some small technical differences, but the visual difference is almost nil and you pay for it with 1/2 the frame rate.

I never meant this as a HL2 > FEAR thread, I was just comparing the two engines since they are the most recent DX9 engines. As for cost saving, I'm not sure spending a year+ developing an engine saves you much money, they could have licensed Source and Havok and spent 1/4 of the time in development. Maybe they expect to license their engine? Not likely, but maybe it's their pipe dream?

 

[Stretchman]

I really wish these kind of threads would just be deleted upon creation.

What fun would that be? We need more of these kinds of threads, IMO. Now. I'm like, right now, as i'm typing this. That's better.

Anyway, I played the FEAR demo and was very impressed with the level of ambience and suspense created throughout the mission. Once I got to the shooting however it seemed to lose pace. The slow, creepy feel was replaced by a first person-max payne like blowout that seemed pretty vanilla.

 

[Koudelka]

Originally posted by: Todd33
Whenever people complain about a sluggish engine some yahoo has to come back with "it

Whats wrong with that?

Since your first post, you've done nothing but complain that you dont like FEAR's engine. Its your opinion, thats all. If you dont like it, dont play it. Otherwise, shut up. These negative FEAR threads have been done to death on every website for the past 2 months since the demo came out.

I'm glad you're not an exec at any company affiliated with gaming. Seems you have no taste for creativity. I'd much rather see people creating their own engines than licensing everyone elses.

It's not the greatest thing in the world to play 10 games all with the same engine. They'll all look the same with different textures.

 

[Sureshot324]

I've only been playing about an hour, but i'm pretty disappointed so far. Every thing looks like a boring warehouse/industrial complex, and the graphics look like they could have come from a three year old game, except for the shadows and particle effects.

The engine is very poorly coded. I checked my task manager after playing the game, and my peak ram usage was 2.5gb! That's just ridiculous for how good the graphics are, and since i only have 1gb it was constantly paging the hd causing slowdowns.

I started the game on hard because i ussually play fps games on hard, but the enemies have such fast reflexes that find myself very dependant on slow motion, and the matrix style effect gets old.

 

[Koudelka]

Yeah thats what most reviews mentioned about FEAR. Slow-mo regenerates a little too fast. I myself would have liked to see it regenerate very slowly. Or regenerate after killing enemies. I really like how hard the enemies are on Hard difficulty, but i dont care for how fast Slow-mo regenerates.


EDIT: The scissor-kick bothers me a little bit, too. Your guy jumps waay too high. Half the time, i find myself jumping OVER the heads of enemies and completely missing them.

 

[raystorm]

Originally posted by: Sureshot324
I've only been playing about an hour, but i'm pretty disappointed so far. Every thing looks like a boring warehouse/industrial complex, and the graphics look like they could have come from a three year old game, except for the shadows and particle effects.

Thats my main issue with the game so far.. every stage is some boring looking office building, warehouse, basement..ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz On top of that I don't think these environments look as nice as the buildings, office levels from Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory. Granted I have a fairly low-end gaming pc (XP 2500+, 1gb ram, 9800) but I don't see anything on screen that validates the low performances. Eh.. I guess I should judge it better when I get a nice gaming rig.

 

[Topweasel]

Originally posted by: raystorm

Originally posted by: Sureshot324
I've only been playing about an hour, but i'm pretty disappointed so far. Every thing looks like a boring warehouse/industrial complex, and the graphics look like they could have come from a three year old game, except for the shadows and particle effects.

Thats my main issue with the game so far.. every stage is some boring looking office building, warehouse, basement..ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz On top of that I don't think these environments look as nice as the buildings, office levels from Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory. Granted I have a fairly low-end gaming pc (XP 2500+, 1gb ram, 9800) but I don't see anything on screen that validates the low performances. Eh.. I guess I should judge it better when I get a nice gaming rig.

It gets better with the maps, but you have toremeber you are working your way through a shipping center, everything is going to rmind you of the whole wharehouse thing. Geez..

Whomever thought the graphics looks old, pay more attention the textures on walls the different types of glass, all of it looks great. The fire is the best I have seen. The Lighting (or lack there of is buetifully done. And the layered textures that actually look like you have taken a chunk out of the wall is great. I don't know what to say besides play more.

 

[raystorm]

Originally posted by: Topweasel

Originally posted by: raystorm

Originally posted by: Sureshot324
I've only been playing about an hour, but i'm pretty disappointed so far. Every thing looks like a boring warehouse/industrial complex, and the graphics look like they could have come from a three year old game, except for the shadows and particle effects.

Thats my main issue with the game so far.. every stage is some boring looking office building, warehouse, basement..ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz On top of that I don't think these environments look as nice as the buildings, office levels from Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory. Granted I have a fairly low-end gaming pc (XP 2500+, 1gb ram, 9800) but I don't see anything on screen that validates the low performances. Eh.. I guess I should judge it better when I get a nice gaming rig.

It gets better with the maps, but you have toremeber you are working your way through a shipping center, everything is going to rmind you of the whole wharehouse thing. Geez..

Whomever thought the graphics looks old, pay more attention the textures on walls the different types of glass, all of it looks great. The fire is the best I have seen. The Lighting (or lack there of is buetifully done. And the layered textures that actually look like you have taken a chunk out of the wall is great. I don't know what to say besides play more.

Oh..I'm not saying it looks bad or anything. I think it looks great considering my low-end gaming rig. I'm only commenting on how dull the levels are in design and but if you say it gets better then my opinion on the levels will change. I'm up to Interval 6 so I still have a ways to go.

 

[MX2]

I found that level 7 is where I am feeling the sweet spot It really has become quite engaing now:thumbsup: