F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin Comments by Kieron Gillen

Thanks EG you've convinced me to get Fear 2. Such a shit review.

To me it sounds like the game could probably score higher but the reviewer wants more/better from Monolith. Not a bad thing I think. They should probably do better.

I am still going to play it, just for the nekkid dead chick and some scares.

This bloke still writes reviews? How quaint.

Reminds of the Mafia review. Just from the demo, it's clear the game cannot get any lower than a 6 or a 7. A 5 would be underrating it.

let me blow it up here-

Reviews are opinions. That's it. Everyone has opinions. Smart people and stupid people. People with jobs and people who are bored at their jobs- even if that job is reviewing a videogame. It can get tiresome to be rigorous, and fairly state opinions based on common sense and perpective if you happen to have to do it all the time. So sometimes, like the rest of us one does just half ass something. Now if I were paying someone to do a job, then I, as the business owner, would not tolerate that employee. But that's just me. Again, every organization does as it does.

The opinion someone gives is just that. Opinions are not stated to persuade one way or another what to do with your money. That's on you, based on all your research, not just on someone else's one time opinion. Believe me, that's not the business model for organizations who review products. The business intention is not to persuade the consuming public where to put their money. It is to state an opinion about a service or product based on that specific transaction or time with the product. That's it. Don't get confused that they are out there to help you out, specifically. There's a distinction.

Oh, to prove my point, one more thing-

Stupid people have jobs too, in nice positions- from the lowest to the highest office in the land. Just because a stupid person has a job does not mean that you follow that stupid person's opinion. Again. It's only their opinion. I see people all over the place comment like" oh well, was gonna buy, but not anymore after this ONE review" Let's say stupid one more time.

In the case here, this wanka of a reviewer is interested in his turn of phrases and wanting to impress us w/ his, "I'll know it when I see it" reasoning and logic, rather than oblige us with any kind of common sense and or perpective. Look, if you played so many god damn fps, and of course only the top % are any good, well then quit wasting your life playing them. Makes sense? Oh, it's your livelihood? Then it sounds like you hate it. Either way, people in jobs they hate don't normally do not do a stand up job. As in life, people who kinda hate their life are kinda depressing, in outlook and perspective. Don't kid yourself or us that you are capable of being wholly objective.

5/10 bit harsh,fans of the game wont be happy

Yay, EG continues their rollercoster ride in silly scoring.

But hey, i guess Clicks are more worth than Credibility these days. EGs a company after all, who wants to make money.

hairsuit +1
I cry inside when people say things like "oh well, was gonna buy, but not anymore after this ONE review".
Do take it into consideration, but dont let it change your mind completly.

Many people buy a game depending upon good reviews only. Reviews shouldnt be misleading n dat 2 4m a reputed website

Well, thought the demo was pretty bad, but I loved the original FEAR exactly for the core mechanics the review says are still intact, and for the brillliant AI and level design. No idea now.

EG and EDGE in the opposite corner, EG gave Sony's great hope KillZone2 9/10 but EDGE awarded it only 7/10 saying its story is cack! EDGE awarded F.E.A.R.2 8/10 and yet .....EG says its only worth 5/10!!!

Gamers who previously expressed that they find EG and EDGE scoring pretty reliable is now up the SHIT CREEK!

Let the battle commence and the only true reviewer left standing!!


Yeah, just a number at the end of the article from a reviewer who is always in an impossible position to be totally objective as the act of putting together an article is always subjective.

Well I found FEAR comparable to Haze and Timeshift on my demo run through, so I think I'm more down with this.

So a cliched FPS with great combat, atmosphere and visuals and superb controls (FEAR2) scores lower than a cliched FPS with great visuals but duck-hunt combat, drab environments and piss-awful controls (KZ2). Interesting.

I enjoyed the FEAR demo enough to play it 3 times but was so turned off with the KZ2 controls that I couldnt be arsed to finish the demo.

EDGE definitely got it right in this case.

Great! The TR U review is no longer the most misguided review on the site.

Sounds like it was marked down very heavily for being a fun shooter offering nothing new.

Strange.

ferose, learn to speak properly or fuck off.

I don't buy your arguments, it's still a buy for me :)

i really enjoyed the demo, loved the 1rst one, so if it's still the same, why shouldn't I enjoy it? :p

Metacritic average is 8, so this is way off the mark.

@farticus

Don't like a PS3 exclusive? Complete shocker. I'm sure no-one saw that coming...

The game looks terrible by the demo.

pc version has square wheels on the carts..lmao!

Yes. Everyone should review the same with the same scores. BAD KIERON.

I don't even care about the review, but SHOGO 2? Please god let it be so!

Hmmm... who do I believe... F.E.A.R. 2 got 8/10 from Edge, who are one of the harshest magazines for reviews, and 5/10 from Eurogamer?

Well I have the game pre-ordered and I absolutely loved the demo (on the PC) as well as the original game and expansion packs so I can't honestly see myself being disappointed with the full game. I guess I'll know soon enough though...

Terrible demo, bad control system that isn't nearly as configurable as it should be and hackneyed storyline that presents nothing new... 5 sounds about right to me.

One point better than Haze,hmm

Edge,Fear 2 is one point better that Killzone 2,EG Fear 2 is 5/10.*
That means Killzone 2=Haze in combined EG,Edge review.

*having fun

A bit too low 5/10 Fear 2 score is,methinks

Kinda dislike the review. Full of pointless sentences for me. But I do agree about the score.

@Widge:

Thank you.

Widge
I agree that people who look at metacritics and say its "way of the mark" should probably think again.
But I think what most people ask for is some kind of red line that runs throu the site and its reviews/reviewers. There is just so many weird scores lately that one does not know what to think.
I dont care if EG score their games in "X potatoes out of X", but Id like every potato to be the same, and id like every reviewer on EG to have a basic understanding of how much one potato is worth.

Personally I want "critics" to review games for me. I dont have time to test everything myself and its in my interest that I can put some value to Keiron Gillens words/score, weight it against other reviews and my own "feel", and out of that make a decision.

As it is now, i "trust" farticus opinion about as much as EGs, and while its just ONE persons opinion (and should be), theres a reason (beside Clicks) that EG make money of off this, while farticus dont.

(Dont ask me while I still read EG, its obviously out of habit and a need for DRAMA.)

A tad harsh I fear...

I like that EG dears to use the whole scale. Not many mags/sites do. Usually 7/10 is really a 5/10 in other words an average game. I do think 5/10 seems a little harsh though. I wasnt going to buy this anyway as SFIV and RE5 are the games for me this spring.

I had high hopes for the game given the novelty factor of the original, slow motion combat and the plot that threaded through the game.

The FEAR 2 demo pretty much nulled any hopes for more of the same, my experience from playing the demo left me with a sense that I was playing a half baked console port, from the washed out graphics, lack of lean feature, horrid boxed display in wide screen and weapon sounds that pretty much all sounded the same.

Obviously thats just my opinion of the demo and maybe I'm just cynical after so many recent PC games feel as though they have sold out to play second fiddle to console focused development.

I feel that the score is pretty accurate if the full game is a sum of the demo....wasted opportunity Monolith.

Not gonna change my opinion, it's a shame EG didn't enjoy it. Thought the demo was great at scaring the player in new ways.

Maybe if EG was advertising the game it'd recieve highers scores

*runs away*

More or less expected after one of the most uninspired demos ever.

@Dezm0nd

Noticed the Rise of the Argonauts banners on the frontpage? EG gave that a 3, so you can probably stop running.

5? Wow, that is low compared to other reviews. Anyway... all FPS-ed out at the moment anyway.

Yup, BS review. Not a historic game, but better than the first. At least a 7.

After playing the demo I was going to get it in one of the Game sales or similar, but that is mainly because Killzone 2 is coming. But 5/10 is pretty ridiculous.

Seriously, play the demo and make up your own minds.

I played the demo and wasn't impressed (but hey, it's just a demo) and replayed FEAR a bit.
Really liked it back then, but it hasn't aged very well. If FEAR 2 is actually FEAR "again" (which I gather as much from the review) it's not something I would buy.

IMHumbleO that is.

"But for anyone who's been running down corridors with shotguns for most of their adult life..."

Thanks for that.

I liked it a lot more than KG did, evidently: http://www.incgamers.com/Games/1500/revi...

Opinions schmopinions.

My GOD KIERON! You gave this game a mark out of ten which is NOT the one I agree with, based on my 10 minutes with the game in the form of the demo! YOU TWAT!

Furthermore, other magazines have rated this higher! How could you possibly have not checked this before deciding on your own score? You fool! Next time find out the metacritic average before deciding on your own score!

Also, I haven't bothered to read the Eurogamer marking policy to find out what a 5/10 actually denotes! But I don't need to, because i'm so right, and your opinions based on playing the full game don't match up with my own expectations! Damn you!

I love Eurogamer.net, but this review does make no sense. There are so much inaccurate things in the review and also it doesn't read as a 5/10.

Now it just feels as if it gets a bad score for not being innovative but still a good game. I mean, it still is different from the crowd with freaky original horror elements, superb A.I., hardcore action and amazing (sound/weapon/visual) effects, right?

Almost looks like EG wants to score games badly (Rise of the Argonauts a 3?), so it looks like they can be strict and have raised the bar for this year's games or something.

I just don't get it. How the hell did Resistance 2 score a 9? That was one of the most uninspiring shooters I played and much worse than Killzone 2 wich scored the same. Because Resistance 2 could support so many people online?

An explanation please! I trust Eurogamer.net, it's my favorite review-website, and their opinions is almost always the same as mine, but this just doesn't feel right. I loved the original F.E.A.R., I want to know how the (imo) good story ends and this seems like a solid sequal with small improvements, but I don't wanna waste my money, just as I did on other games Eurogamer.net scored badly.

TBH Edge is going down the pan, really needs a shake up in its format... probably dwindling sales = controversial scores.

I subscribe to both Edge and GamesTM every month, and GamesTM is consistantly the better mag. (although they gave KZ2 a poor preview last month)

Farticus: "was so turned off with the KZ2 controls that I couldnt be arsed to finish the demo"

One of the alternative control setups will give you COD4 controls for Killzone2. Stop being such a dick.

The more reviews that go by, the more I realise that zzap 64 had the right idea.They had one person reviewing something and then had 2 other people throwing their own thoughts in as well.

I think a game should only have a review score once its been round a few people and not just one but then I guess that would upset the apple cart too much.

Not a surprise. FEAR 1 was a painfully average and hugely overrated corridor shooter, this is more of the same. Are there any warehouse maps? I hope there are, I do so love chasing bad guys around crates in a warehouse.

t8yman says: learn to speak properly or fuck off.

learn to speak properly or fuck off, t8yman.

At the end of the day, even though they put their views forward as the opinion of a publication, you're still effectively buying into one person's perspective. The score tends to become more important if you like to wave numbers around at people as some sort of set in stone official benchmark of goodness.

Its like the way some people love Fallout 3, some people think its over-rated. Disagree and you get "but this is a 10" waved in your face. For the record, I think Fallout 3 is a 10 for me, I'm sure people are allowed to disagree. Everyone is correct.

Sounds like they've just remade the first game with nicer graphics and haven't listened to any of the widespread complaints about it - at their peril.

No One Lives Forever - Awesome
Tron 2.0 - Awesome
FEAR - Meh! (although DM was sweet)
FEAR 2 - Meh!

LEARN FROM YOUR MISTAKES!

To me it may be more relevant(?) what Kristian (Reed) thinks about this one. He loved the original...

How did R2 score a 9? I seem to remember Dan backing that up by saying he genuinely enjoyed it. What did you expect? Him to call you and make sure his opinion was the right one first?