F.E.A.R. 3

From Crappy Games Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
F.E.A.R. 3
F3AR-PC.jpg
Definitely not as scary as the first two games, AKA The Last of Us Part II of the F.E.A.R. franchise.
Protagonist: Point Man
Paxton Fettel
Genre: First-Person Shooter
Survival Horror
Platforms: Microsoft Windows
PlayStation 3
Xbox 360
Release Date: NA: June 21, 2011
AU: June 22, 2011
EU: June 24, 2011
Game Engine: Despair
Developer: Day 1 Studios
Publisher: Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment
Franchise: F.E.A.R.
Previous Game: F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin


F.E.A.R. 3 (stylized as F.3.A.R.) is a horror-themed first-person shooter video game developed by Day 1 Studios and published by Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment. It is the third and final installment in the F.E.A.R. trilogy.

Bad Qualities

  1. Unlike its two predecessors, this entry is a typical cookie-cutter shooter with a few creepy scenes, instead of an action-packed horror game. Most of the time you'll just be shooting enemies, with scary scenes being a really rare occurence.
  2. Very short campaign which can be finished in six to eight hours.
  3. Poor graphics, even by 2011 standards, making the game look like it's being rendered with a coke bottle.
  4. The multiplayer mode is weak.
  5. Alma, while still being important to the plot and making some appearance in the game, has her role heavily reduced. This time, the main antagonist is the Creep, a nightmarish manifestation of her father, Harlan Wade. In context, it makes sense, since Alma is busy giving birth to her and Becket's child, but her and the Creep could be flashed out much better in this entry.
  6. The game's level design doesn't accommodate for the slow motion, like in previous games, due to the long ranged design rather the corridor design like in previous games.
  7. Speaking of level design, here it's much more linear, narrow and straight-forward with barely any open areas and places to explore.
  8. While the soundtrack is decent, it gets ruined by rock/metal tracks that don't fit into a F.E.A.R. game, like Four Rusted Horses by Marilyn Manson and Mother by Danzig.
  9. Bland story.
  10. Countless plot holes, like never giving any explanation to what happened to the Point Man after the first game and where was he during the course of the second one, and not giving any information on the fates of Keira Stokes and Genevieve Aristide.
  11. Terribly low quality sound effects for guns.
  12. While the bullet time feature from the F.E.A.R. 1 returns, you won't really need it much most of the time, unless you play on higher difficulties, since most enemies die much quicker and don't pose a real threat.
  13. Like F.E.A.R. 2, dual wielding doesn't return from the first game.
  14. Some wapons like the riot shield are unnecessarily over powered.
  15. Cheap enemy placements.
  16. Cheap looking cutscenes with awkward animations.
  17. The console versions suffer from framerate issues.
  18. The survival co-op mode can be bland at times.
  19. The stealth (while no where near as awful as in Resident Evil 6 and Rogue Warrior) is pretty poor, the enemies rarely detect you even if you’re making noise.

Good Qualities

  1. A few good jump scares.
  2. Creepy and unsettling locations and monsters.
  3. Unlike the first two games, you have two playable protagonists, both with different mechanics.
    • Point Man offers an standard FPS experience by using weapons, throwing grenades, etc. Plus, a slow motion ability to slow down time, allowing the player to shoot targets with accuracy.
    • Fettel cannot use conventional weapons, however he can use psychic powers and telekinesis to suspend and throw objects, possess enemy soldiers, crush suspended enemies, and more.
  4. The weapon selection is quite good.
  5. It explores Point Man's and Paxton's parts of the lore much better.

Reception

Although it received positive reviews from critics, it was received mixed-to-negative reviews by many fans of the franchise.

Most reviewers criticized its visuals and lack of scares, but praising the shooting mechanics, fun co-op, and exciting multiplayer components. Others criticized Warner Bros. by not being faithful to the series's original formula.

Videos

Comments


avatar

HinD

3 months ago
Score 0
Wasn't this on the AGW?
avatar

ItMeansNothing

3 months ago
Score 0
No.
avatar

Zeephare

3 months ago
Score 0
It actually was. Dready have deleted an AGW page because this game is not enough decent for being on sister wiki.
avatar

Mr. Dready

3 months ago
Score 0
We shouldn't rely on critics, much i mostly rely on user's.

You are not allowed to post comments.