F.E.A.R. or Quake 4 (1 Viewer)

[withoutaface]

Yesterday I bought my computer a nice christmas present in a 6600GT, now I need to know which of these games I should purchase first, I'm leaning towards FEAR.

 

[ogmzergrush]

F.E.A.R. was shit-your-pants goodness. I usually find it pretty hard to get too shook up over scary games, but the way it gets you in and alternates between all-out fighting and intensely creepy breaks in the action (Which drag on, and on, and on, when you're waiting for the fights again so you can relax) was really brilliant.

I found that I had trouble playing the game for more than a few hours in a sitting, as I needed time to calm down a bit, which the game never provided (A good thing for fans of the intense, but I'm going soft in my old age).

On the other hand, Quake 4 was a much more adrenaline fuelled endeavour, and was a little creepy at times but overall was just a run and gun blastorama (Which I also loved). If you *really* loved Quake 2 when it happened, the nostalgia value in Quake 4 should make it well worth a look, and the multiplay, perfect Everyone bitches about it being a rehash, but I love it like the firstborn I never had.

Ultimately if you were into Quake 3 in a big way, I'd imagine that the multiplay in Qauke 4 should keep you busy for a long time, while the multiplay in F.E.A.R. seems to be a bit underdeveloped, or just basic, in comparison to the single player campaign. On the other hand though, there's a lot more depth and length in the F.E.A.R. single player side, while you'll rip through Quake 4 in a shorter period of time.

Ultimately I think if you're up for multiplay, Q4, and if not, F.E.A.R. Personally I'm digging Q4 more at the moment so that's where I vote.

 

[Krangelus]

The graphics of quake 4 are disgusting.

 

[hipPo3]

F.E.A.R is awesome.

 

[Serius]

get fear

ive read shocking review of Q4, saying its exactly the same as doom3, some of the same monsters are recycled... storyline is basically Q2, except with randomly generated rooms unlike Doom3 which were static, but the same style [ e.g red lighting, dark places, walk into room, door closes, lights off and baddies attack]
and the multiplayer is supposed to be exactly the same as Q3

Fear on the other hand...rave reviews, supposed best scary story line ever created in a game[ i suppose little girls scare the reviewers], a good mix of a fps, a japanese stlyle horror film [ the ring anyone?] and a few special powers thrown in for good measure[slowing time etc]

my money definetely with fear... even if u had the money to get both, save your cash fo a better game

 

[ogmzergrush]

I think the person who wrote the review of Quake 4 that you read is on crack. Not that I'm interested in debating what they thought of it or anything like that, because obviously it's only an opinion, but a lot of what you've said simply isn't correct.

 

[Hanzo]

FEAR > Quake4

 

[Serius]

its a published mag [ PcPowerplay] so if u wanna ring em up or write a letter and tell them the article painted a false picture of Q4 then go ahead, personally from other stuff ive read [ e.g multiplayer is basically arena] it sounds like it was on target, but probably exagerated for god knows what reasons

 

[AntiHyper]

The graphics of quake 4 are disgusting.

As if, the textures are as good as doom 3 and the effects are as good as cod2.

If I were to get both games, maybe get q4 before fear.

 

[ogmzergrush]

its a published mag [ PcPowerplay] so if u wanna ring em up or write a letter and tell them the article painted a false picture of Q4 then go ahead, personally from other stuff ive read [ e.g multiplayer is basically arena] it sounds like it was on target, but probably exagerated for god knows what reasons

lol fair enough, times like these I wonder if reviewers even play the game first I am deeply puzzled by the fact that they have come to those conclusions though, especially the randomised rooms one.

On a sidenote, I think that people complaining about multiplay being nearly identical to Quake 3 (Aside from being much better looking) probably should have read up in advance, as that's exactly what it was advertised to be. I recall it got a warm reception when it happened (Aside from people moaning about lack of a real single player campaign, funny how people complain no matter what they get ), and it stands to reason that people still interested in the same sort of gameplay should still get the same sort of buzz.

 

[withoutaface]

Next they'll be telling us that CS:Source is exactly the same as 1.6.

 

[pLuvia]

Get BF2 awesome game

 

[Serius]

lol fair enough, times like these I wonder if reviewers even play the game first I am deeply puzzled by the fact that they have come to those conclusions though, especially the randomised rooms one.

On a sidenote, I think that people complaining about multiplay being nearly identical to Quake 3 (Aside from being much better looking) probably should have read up in advance, as that's exactly what it was advertised to be. I recall it got a warm reception when it happened (Aside from people moaning about lack of a real single player campaign, funny how people complain no matter what they get ), and it stands to reason that people still interested in the same sort of gameplay should still get the same sort of buzz.

aside from my negative comments [ i tend to polarize things] iam sure i would enjoy Q4 alot. i really like Q2 when it came out, enjoyed the single player and i thought the intro movie for it was the coolest thing ever[ how main character gets launched in a pod and crash lands] Q3 i didnt much like because it didnt really expand on the storyline, it was kinda fun though and we played it at school with a shitload of people. now Q4 is going back in the direction that i like with a better story line and so forth, i dont care if it uses doom3 engine, a game doesnt have to look cutting edge to be good

still, my preference would be fear, it appeals to me a little more and the reason i like the idea of Q4 is most likely something to do with because iam a fan of the series and a return to the more traditional single play is cool...so q4 is probably fairly good, but for the average gamer, go for fear

 

[ogmzergrush]

aside from my negative comments [ i tend to polarize things] iam sure i would enjoy Q4 alot. i really like Q2 when it came out, enjoyed the single player and i thought the intro movie for it was the coolest thing ever[ how main character gets launched in a pod and crash lands] Q3 i didnt much like because it didnt really expand on the storyline, it was kinda fun though and we played it at school with a shitload of people. now Q4 is going back in the direction that i like with a better story line and so forth, i dont care if it uses doom3 engine, a game doesnt have to look cutting edge to be good

still, my preference would be fear, it appeals to me a little more and the reason i like the idea of Q4 is most likely something to do with because iam a fan of the series and a return to the more traditional single play is cool...so q4 is probably fairly good, but for the average gamer, go for fear

Absolutely, I think a large part of what makes me like Quake 4 as much as I do is the nostalgia value. Without that, I think F.E.A.R. would be a far more attractive proposition

 

[Roguedeth]

Fear i loved it and cant wait for the sequel it will give you a few shocks by being so friggin creepy.

 

[Hanzo]

best way to play fear is to play at night in the dark...
turn off the lights in your room
close the door
turn off your speakers
and put some headfones on
and make da monitor dark
you will get the maximum scare
hawhawhaw

 

[Collin]

I actually grabbed both at the same time, and I would have to say both are pretty good. F.E.A.R is more plot-driven, with a slower tempo and that lingering horror theme following you every step of the way. The single-player campaign was excellent, probably one of the best I've played for a modern FPS (along with Far Cry and HL2).

Quake IV is more of an adrenalin pumping adventure, where you're blazing around at a relatively faster pace, blowing things up and killing as many Strogg as the Makron can throw at you.

I really can't decide, I've been excited over F.E.A.R since I heard about it 14 months ago and it certainly met my expectations, yet Quake IV is also a highly enjoyable experience. Infact, I would suggest that the games are suited to different moods. I would get both.

 

[Serius]

Quake 4 tries to get as much away from its Doom brother, and it shows. Doom is slow and boring. Quake throws you in the action along with team mates and an arrogant "I'm too important to die!" Technician. Quake has numerous outdoor settings and open terrain, plus vehicles to boot.

Both games have zombies (for different reasons), but they don't appear until the later half of Quake.

I've never come across a randomly generated room in Quake 4. They're all built by level designers.

ok ive found the offending article pg38 of 2005 christmas edition PcPowerplay

heres the snippets from it: "Firstly it looks exactly like Doom 3"
"use the same engine"
"includes all the monsters that got rejected from Doom"
"same single player game as Quake 2"
"fighting the strogg through a series of mechanical levels with a more or less random layout"
"Same multiplayer game as Quake 3"

yeh lots of negativity

 

[Jase]

Personally i thought Quake 4 sucked ass. the enemies are boring as hell. there is however one really cool sequence in which let's just say.. you get a pretty makeover.

the action in fear was a little repetitive and overall lacking. but you just can't beat the experience of having the living shit scared out of you endless times while jumping around every corner in slomo. also. .dynamic lighting, effects and physics were awesome.