Monolith Productions is considered, among many an avid FPS gamer, as one of the top FPS developers, with acclaimed titles such as FEAR, Condemned, No One Lives Forever, Shogo and Blood having come from its stable. The developer has been around since 1994, so it understands what makes the industry (and gamers) tick. There have been numerous hits and misses though, especially with some of the titles Monolith published, but in the wake of the critical success of FEAR and the Condemned franchise on current gen consoles, it felt like they could do nothing wrong. But they did, and it culminated in the monumental disaster that was FEAR 2.
'Monumental disaster' you say? Perhaps that is a bit heavy handed – FEAR 2 garnered a solid 77% aggregate, but when compared to its predecessor, which scored an 85% aggregate, it's clearly the inferior game. But how? And why? These questions are especially pertinent after the success of Condemned 2. It's worth mentioning Condemned 2 because the two franchises share so many similarities – they're both dark, action packed FPS games with an emphasis on character and storytelling, and both rely on supernatural undertones ranging from the subtle to the extreme to make the hair on the back of your neck stand on end. Also, they both hold their own in the visuals department. Add to that the fact that Monolith knows how to get FPS movement with an analogue controller on current gen consoles just right (FEAR 2 and especially Condemned 2 puts the sense of motion and collision detection in games such as Half-Life 2 and Halo 3 to shame), and you've got a recipe for success. It is fair to say that Condemned 2 just barely scored an 80% aggregate, but the fact is that 3% makes all the difference.
1. If looks could kill.
The first thing Monolith did wrong with FEAR 2 was the cosmetic overhaul. Compared to its predecessor (which still holds up graphically, even by today's standards), FEAR 2 changed not only the models, textures and sounds, but also the feel of guns, enemies and all other kinds of design elements. They also applied some kind of effect akin to motion blur which seriously impedes the visual potential this game has. Why!? Is it an attempt at making the graphics seem more realistic? Is it an attempt at covering up poor textures? Needless to say, it doesn't work. In fact, the complete graphical overhaul of the game causes weapons to have neon sights, and enemy AIs to have glowing goggles which draw immediate attention to them (how impractical is this!?). This is completely out of keeping with the first game and it destroys any notion of continuity, making the player feel like he's playing a whole new game. Subtle improvements won't be frowned upon, but to the extent in which changes have been applied in FEAR 2, it serves no other function but to break the suspension of disbelief so eloquently crafted in the original FEAR.
2. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
The second thing they did wrong was change the control scheme. This may be a minor gripe, but if a fan of the series would like to really appreciate the FEAR experience, he or she might want to play FEAR and FEAR 2 back to back. Enjoyment will come at a frustrating cost: FEAR gave the player the ability to lean left or right be holding down either of the left or right shoulder buttons. These have since been replaced by change to last used weapon and throw grenade respectively. Also, the buttons for flashlight and medpack are reversed in FEAR 2. There is nothing more fun than acting out of habit in FEAR 2 after a session of FEAR: consume an unnecessary health pack when you try to activate your flashlight; throw a grenade against a wall and promptly kill yourself while you try to lean one way or the other. And the worst part is you can't even remap the buttons on your controller!!
3. Consolitis AKA dumb down the AI.
The third and absolutely unforgivable mistake is enemy AI. FEAR prided itself on having some of the most intelligent squad-based AI in an FPS title at the time of its release, rivalling that of Half-Life before it. It was lauded by fans and critics alike for this achievement, and to this day FEAR's AI puts recent releases such as Far Cry 2 and Call of Duty 4 in the doghouse. In FEAR, AIs took cover, flanked, flushed out the player with grenades, and most importantly, waited in ambush. FEAR 2's AIs, on the other hand, cannot rush to their brutal and untimely deaths quicker! Yes, they flank, and they throw the occasional grenade, but whenever the opportunity presents itself, one AI runs to reinforce a fallen comrade and dies in the EXACT SAME SPOT! Right out in the open, where any logical enemy unit KNOWS he shouldn't go. How is this possible? How is it even forgivable, after FEAR?
4. More consolitis AKA too easy.
FEAR 2 really is too damn easy. Even on hard mode, FEAR 2 hardly poses a challenge. Monolith may be excused for this, as it seems that most developers of console FPS games deliver titles with little depth and true challenge, but FEAR 2 doesn't even allow the player to unlock an extreme mode like its orignator did. There's easy, normal and hard. That's all. Playing through hard is a cakewalk for any seasoned FPS veteran, and given that FEAR 2 is a sequel and that Monolith obviously has a dedicated following given its franchise history, this is a true shame. FEAR's extreme mode offers a true challenge, even to the seasoned player, but it'll feel like it's all too easy and over too soon with the sequel.
5. Take the one thing that makes your game truly awesome and mess it up.
The fifth, and final mistake they made, was poor implementation of Slomo. Slomo is the FEAR franchise's unique selling point, and one that was used to great effect in the first game. A technique pioneered by Remedy Entertainment with their Max Payne series, Monolith perfected it in FEAR: fire fights became more violent, brutal and visceral in nature after you tapped the slomo button; explosions grew louder, clearer, more destructive; debris went flying all over the place in a dazzle of sparks and flailing electrical tendrils. This was achieved by applying a mild colour filter and changing the field of vision slightly so that it seemed as if the character truly focused (like Neo in The Matrix), beoming the ultimate fighting machine. In simple terms, it was an action gamer's absolute wet dream. Bliss, in the truest sense of the word. And then they had to go and screw it all up.
FEAR 2's slomo is by no means bad, but unlike FEAR, it just doesn't have the same WOW-factor – it doesn't blow you away, as the novelty has worn off long since the original game. On top of that, for some reason enemy models receive a certain glowing makeover when aimed at in slomo. As if the bright neon textures on their armour wasn't enough! It wasn't needed in FEAR – why include it in FEAR 2? To make an already easy game even easier? No. Monolith should have imagined more exciting scenarios within which to put the slomo effect to great use. While some may argue that it serves as a poor example, Dead Space employed slomo to great effect during certain puzzle and combat scenarios. Of course FEAR 2 is not a puzzle driven game, but surely Monolith could have expanded the slomo mechanic to elevate its presence in this game to something that is more than just a subpar gimmick whose novelty has worn off. If you want to feel like the ultimate badass foe-destroyer, cleaning up the mean streets, then play FEAR. FEAR 2, while still providing moments of brilliant slomo, pales in comparison.
All things said, FEAR 2 is not a complete abortion. It does a lot of things right. It's a solid FPS game with a good overall story arch which ties in nicely with the first game's plot, even though it relies heavily on player participation (like so many other games out there today, FEAR 2 uses various data logs scattered through its many levels to tell the story – if players miss these, they essentially won't understand a thing about the plot). FEAR 2 also introduces mech armour combat – a throwback to Monolith's Shogo game from a few years back, and though these sequences are terribly fun, had they been implemented with greater care they would have made for a much better game.
For fans it's a sad affair because it has resulted in a title which held so much promise and had so much potential, yet sadly fails to deliver the goods. It just barely misses the winner's circle and will be over before you know it, doomed to be forgotten much sooner than its stellar predecessor. One can only hope that Monolith learns from these mistakes. Perhaps it is time for the developer to revisit older franchises? A sequel to Shogo or No One Lives Forever? Perhaps even a remake of the classic Blood? Maybe even something wholly new? We'll have to wait and see.
| Tweet |
RSS Feed
Atom Feed
Follow us
