|
Does jump plus melee when standing still do a kick in FEAR 2? I recall it did a roundhouse kick, or a spin kick, or something like that in the first one... Also, I don't recall having access to the slow motion in the hospital until walking into that little capsule (where you see the colonel for the first time). I did like how the guards actually responded to your use of slow motion - you're moving superhumanly fast, so of course they're going to start making GBS threads themselves. That said, I actually prefer the weapon designs and selection from the first game (with the exception of the SMG; that gun was always the first one I ditched, given the choice). I never did get around to finishing the expansions. If I ever play the original again, I'll have to see about doing that; my copy's on steam anyway, which means I have to download all three regardless.
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 17:02 |
|
|
The hammerhead was much more accurate in the first game - to the point where it was often worth carrying one at the expense of an assault rifle. I've just started playing the original again, and one thing I've noticed is that if you pick up a weapon that you don't already have, you get two full magazines of ammo, so it's actually pretty hard to run out of ammo for anything that enemies are actually carrying. Pity that pistols are so rare though - I've found that even a single pistol out-performs an SMG in most firefights, though again that's in the original game. That said, in the original game, I tend to walk around with the zoom active, and take careful shots. I found that the shotgun was actually decently accurate at medium range too. Well, medium by video game standards, at least.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
I have to be honest, I never really liked Condemned (and as a result, never bothered to finish it). It started off well enough but after a while, I just got bored. I enjoyed the forensic scenes well enough, but there were only so many hobos I could beat to death with a 2x4 before I put the game down and never picked it back up.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2014 22:38
|
|
|
The good colonel should have quit while he was ahead. Sorry. Those fast enemies aren't actually that hard to deal with; the only trouble is, you basically have to use your slow motion, because they're one of the few enemies that are as fast as you are. If you go into slow mo as soon as you see one, then deactivate it as soon as you've killed it, you'll generally have enough to keep doing that. Much like the assassin enemy type that just showed up, and was in the original game as well, I'm pretty sure they're actually designed with slow motion in mind.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
The first game used the penetrator as well, and that was far more accurate than the hammerhead too.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2014 00:11
|
|
|
Those badass ninjas were actually enemies from the first game. They were never explained there either. Given that they first showed up in the Armacham building, I'd assume they work for them.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2014 14:11
|
|
|
I always assumed that the whole point of those enemies was to put you up against enemies who were just as fast as you - which I thought worked quite well. Their cloaking doesn't actually work when you're in slow motion, if memory serves, and they go down in not very many hits.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2014 16:55
|
|
|
You get four slots.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2014 01:58
|
|
|
You know, immediately after uploading, only the low resolution stuff is actually available, right? That's normal for Youtube, because they re-encode it at the lowest resolution first, and the highest last, regardless of the resolution of the source video. If you find that only 360p is available in future, it might be worth waiting an hour or two to see if that changes.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 12:40
|
|
|
As regards the reasons I felt the first game was much better, there are three that come to mind. First, all of the guns feel like they pack a punch in the first game, whereas in the second, the pistol and SMG are essentially useless except against ghosts. Accurate shooting is rewarded regardless of which weapon you use (with the zoom key being even more well used than the slow motion key when I play). Second, when creepy stuff happened in the first game, it typically worked quite well. And third, the storytelling in the first game was based almost entirely on exploration. Between the answer machine messages and the computers you find around the place, you learn loads about how the situation you're in developed. The exposition is done in small chunks, spread out within the game; while in the second game, the exposition is done in two or three dumps. False Edit: Oh, there's a fourth one: In FEAR 2, you accomplish precisely gently caress all. You learn nothing more about the situation than you knew going in (which is, to be honest, pretty much all you accomplish in the first game), and you don't resolve anything. Hell, I'm willing to bet that if I played FEAR 1 and then FEAR 3, and somehow forgot everything about FEAR 2, I wouldn't feel like I'd particularly missed out on anything. If your intention is to create a trilogy, the middle act has to accomplish something. Unfortunately, all it does is apparently make it clear that Alma is about to destroy the world (Christ that's incredibly loving clichéd in and of itself nowadays), and introduce an NPC for the third game. Everything this game accomplished could have been done in a prologue level in FEAR 3 and you'd be missing out on nothing.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2014 18:24
|
|
|
FEAR 2 wasn't a bad game on its own merits, I don't think. I think it suffers when compared to its, frankly superior, predecessor. Frankly, I just found the second game disappointing.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2014 16:05
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 17:02 |
|
|
Nah; no amount of body armour can protect you from plot. She could have been sat in an M1 tank, but when the plot says you die, you die.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2014 18:05
|
|