Zero Punctuation: Fear 2

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT
 

i agree with him except on the no sequals what so ever, i want killzone damnit lol please make an exception :)

BlueInkAlchemist:

Do developers not know about Zero Punctuation? Or are the production teams really that thick?

Maybe the production teams don't take Yahtzee to be the all-knowing guru off gaming, especially when he has such a streamlined and often non-commercial taste in games.

Liked the review, although I don't think sequels should be banned per se, but that sequels have to be run through a stringent "Actually Makes Worthwhile Improvements to the Game Mechanics" filter before allowed out the door. Any who fail this test shall be bludgeoned to death by Yahtzee with a sack of fan hate mail.

...

Is Yahtzee making a crack about console gamers there? If not, my bad, but if so....I bring to your attention, Mr. Croshaw: Exhibit A: Any console controller of the last four generations save the Wii. Exhibit B: The keyboard and mouse on your PC. Scientific control: Prince of Persia: Sands of Time. I am a console gamer because every game that I have ever played that has ever required real-time control of a character is a hundred times less aggravating and a thousand times more enjoyable playing it with a console controller than a PC set up.

Well, I agree with the over-the-top amount of armor and health. I'm playing on Hard and have no trouble at all - which might also have something to do with the way bullet time makes you invulnerable if used right.
It is more of the original FEAR but I enjoy it, since I also liked the first part very much.
And the Horror is, imho, better implemented than in the first game, where you always had some static on your comm-system before anything scary happens. Which makes you dread the static itself, but not so much what comes afterwards. ;)
In FEAR 2, Alma seems to be present more continously and it's a lot more oppresive now (in a positive way).
It's true that sometimes I actually MISS the scary stuff because I look somewhere else at the time. :(
Can't be helped, I guess, unless the corridors/areas right before the scary stuff are very, very confined, kinda forcing you to look in the right direction. Hm.

Sewblon:
Banning sequels probably isn't worth losing half life 2, Civilization 3, and Super Mario Galaxy, but remakes should have the death penalty, preferably death by auto cannibalism.

Half life 2 and Super Mario Galaxy (I haven't played civ) are rare exceptions to the non-sequel rule. Firstly Mario is a mascot character, so games named "Mario" function by a completely different rule set.

Mario 1 and then Mario 2 (and 3 and 64 and RPG and Galaxy and all the rest) make use of solid and well defined platforming mechanics, have independent and isolated story lines (which is the primary issue referred to in the vid) and offer significant evolution in the game-play from title to title. F.E.A.R. and F.E.A.R. 2 doesn't have any of this, neither do a majority of the other sequels being released right now. Mario was also a franchise before the time of industry sequelitis.

Half-life was being designed as a episodic gaming experience (though the timeline on releases still needs to be figured out) quite some time ago as well. Furthermore the Half Life 2 franchise plays like a game that is going to have sequels to it (i.e. not much play-time).

Civ 3, I would assume, is comparable to the elder scrolls or fallout or starcraft / warcraft series. A sequel every five to ten years is completely different from a sequel every one to two years.

Exceptions always exist. Movies were in the sequel phase in the eighties (Friday the thirteenth five, Police Academy 6, Revenge of The Nerds 3) and that passed. Movies like Spider Man and batman and Harry Potter are rare exceptions to this rule. Transformers and the fantastic four remind us why we shouldn't revisit that period again.

Personally, I'd be too disappointed if HalfLife 2 didn't exist to have a world without sequels...

The world would infact be worse without sequels. We woulddn't have battlefront two, halo's 2 or 3, the battle for middle earth two and oh yeah one of yahtzee's favorite games thief 2. Of course everyone here takes yahtzee's words like they were from the divine one himself my god think for yourselves people Jesus.

The genetically engineered lucha libre wrestler is an actual movie called Wrestlemaniac. And yes, it's as stupid as you might imagine.

The only time I ever remember quick-time events being even slightly effective was Soul Calibur 3, where you would have to press X to not lose a little health going into the next battle. An effective QTE because you couldn't die outside of battle but failing the QTE would put you at a disadvantage. Of course, they shiny gold star is taken off when you realize that you will play three QTEs almost everytime you play the game with any character. Gets repetitive and makes you wonder why they thought it was a good idea.

Te only time I will ever accept QTEs are this: "Press X to stop developers from using quick-time events." And even then, they'd expect you to press some 40-button combination, simply because QTE-using developers are retards.

Oh, and great review. Yahtzee seems to be getting his spark back. Must be crawling out of the New Year Blues.

Also, while I am for deleting bad sequels from all existance, only -ilogies like the Star Wars franchise or Halo, that mercilessly drag out their story should be euthanized. Good sequels, where they tell a different story using different characters, or using the same character in a slightly but not significantly related story, are all right. Mario and Mega Man proved that.
But for games that recycle the same material (Tomb Raider) ad nauseum, ie. more than once, deserve to meet "the man resembling a shaved bear" from Painkiller.

I think instead of saying "No Sequels at all," I think a better declaration would be, "Don't drag out stories over multiple games." For example, the Resident Evil series has lived long past it's welcome in terms of story. It's amazing how a story that is so bad and flawed has spanned like 6+ games with so many unlikeable and unrelatable characters. Final Fantasy gets a slide by having tons of games that simply share a name as opposed to a plot that won't end. I think better consolidation and closure is better than simply wiping away all sequels.

On a side note: Why do people still post "first" and such, although it's pretty clear by now they'll be suspended...

OK, on to the ZP vid! I have no urge to play F.E.A.R 2 now.. Thanks alot Ben...No irony..

Well done Mr. Croshaw, a very entertaining and accurate review.

I think part of F.E.A.R. 2s problem was that they originally designed the game without access to the F.E.A.R. name. I think they were just going to call it 'Project Origin' before their former publisher gave/sold them back the right to use F.E.A.R. So in all honesty this game was supposed to be about Project Origin and not about the point man or the F.E.A.R. team. This may have had a hand in the mediocrity of the games story.

However, even with that understanding, I can not forgive the ending. I mean I sort of saw it coming after Alma assaults the PC in the school, but it still kind of made me feel dirty inside.

When all is said and done, FEAR 2 feels more like a side story or episode than a complete game to me, and is nothing I wouldd actually buy.

Splendid!

The only thing i missed was an appropriate closure of this review, good gods man, the ending of FEAR2 is just.... eww...

Another great review from ZP. XP

I can see Yahtzee's point about a world with no sequels. Instead of making sequels, just put multiple discs in one case similar to games such as FF7 and Tales of Symphonia.

Sorry Yahtzee but you have commited a sin...One thing I loath is people saying when in reference to a movie/game that came before a sequel or whatever as "GhostBusters One" or "Jaws One" There called Ghostbusters and Jaws respectivly. Makes my piss boil it does.

That aside another stonkingly solid review

Hehe, I couldn't help but laugh at the "no sequels" thing. Even when I eat my favorite food, I still prefer it be fresh and not a leftover, despite it being the same food.

Hell, I wonder - "Baww it's like, the same as the first" - so they change it - "Baww it's too different"

Sequels = damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Grr. I loved Rome Total War and I'm nobody's hairy dad . . .

I have a new proposal. Instead of banning sequels, all creative writers, directors, and producers must run any sequel ideas by Mr. Croshaw. If the sequel does not pass his requirements, it will not be released to the public at large.

i played the game and... well... sad, just awfully sad

Maybe they know about it but ZP is not what I would call a high level of intellectual discussion on game design.

To be fair, FEAR 2 isn't exactly a high level of intellectual game design either. Fear 1 had a few effective sequences, but most where cheap scares, like Alma popping up right at the top of a ladder.

Since you're pretty much the epitome of super soldiers there's never anything to be afraid of, and since you're nothing but a gun transportation unit without a voice interface it's not really possible to care about your own relation to the various goings on. It might get better, but so far it's more of them same, only now the cheap scares are gone too.

Eh, it's a servicable shooter. I run, I shoot things, I run some more, I shoot some bigger things. Seems like I'm renting more nowadays....

My question though, is why, if this is supposed to take place directly after the events in the first F.E.A.R. did the clones soldiers suddenly upgrade their armor and weapons? Shouldn't the look exactly like the clone soldiers from the first game, and be using the exact same weapons?

How about just a "Bad Game Death Penalty" istead of no sequels?

Foreign Shadow:

Is Yahtzee making a crack about console gamers there? If not, my bad, but if so....I bring to your attention, Mr. Croshaw: Exhibit A: Any console controller of the last four generations save the Wii. Exhibit B: The keyboard and mouse on your PC. Scientific control: Prince of Persia: Sands of Time. I am a console gamer because every game that I have ever played that has ever required real-time control of a character is a hundred times less aggravating and a thousand times more enjoyable playing it with a console controller than a PC set up.

Taste and familiarization with a certain control scheme is pretty much the direct opposite of scientific. Also, there is a reason most successful console FPS have some kind of aiming assistance.

Complaining about games that had cliff hangers for sequels that have no confirmation of getting made and he puts Beyond Good and Evil instead of The Longest Journey? Guess he never played the latter.

And doesn't Beyond Good and Evil sorta-kinda-maybe have an announced sequel?

MisterIncognito:
My question though, is why, if this is supposed to take place directly after the events in the first F.E.A.R. did the clones soldiers suddenly upgrade their armor and weapons? Shouldn't the look exactly like the clone soldiers from the frist game, and be using the exact same weapons?

I think one of the intel tidbits you find explains this. Something about a newer batch of replicas that were being tested during the incident. They weren't out and about until the crap hit the fan, as opposed to the ones Fettel already had for the first game, so they're late to the party.

Not 100% sure of it, but it seems like the typical ret-con for game continuity. Then again, feel free to correct me or simply say Monolith got lazy. (and didn't feel the need to explain)

"So far, only the Japanese has succeeded in creating a 'scary' game."

why was he banned 14 days for saying that?

panthrjd:
Complaining about games that had cliff hangers for sequels that have no confirmation of getting made and he puts Beyond Good and Evil instead of The Longest Journey? Guess he never played the latter.

And doesn't Beyond Good and Evil sorta-kinda-maybe have an announced sequel?

Wasn't "Dreamfall" a sequel to TLJ? To be fair, "Dreamfall" ended on a cliffhanger too, which I wasn't exactly thrilled with when I had reached the end.

mark_n_b:
Yes! A world without sequels would be a beautiful place. Companies wouldn't deign to drop the coolest of IP's involving people who bust spirits just because they are only interested in "sequel and franchise properties" and we would get much more innovation and variation. Prototype 1 (and I am going to be the first to call it that because that's what it is) will be awesome Prototype II and III and so on will be considerably less so.

This is why I respect Croshaw and enjoy his reviews (I won't even deign to watch any other video feature on this site) he knows and is saying the things it will take developers and publishers a good ten years to figure out on their own.

Although I love to be an optimist, I'll have to side with Shadowkirby here:

ShadowKirby:

BlueInkAlchemist:

Do developers not know about Zero Punctuation? Or are the production teams really that thick?

Maybe they know about it but ZP is not what I would call a high level of intellectual discussion on game design.

Vlane:

ShadowKirby:

Wasder:
A world without sequels... A good thing?

Nope, the game industry would be dead.

Yeah right. Good joke.

The game industry was built on the sequel model. No Mario series, no Zelda series, only the original Prince of Persia, only one Madden, NHL games that, like it or not, sell. People will buy franchises they trust.

mark_n_b:

tobyornottoby:
NO it wouldn't be wonderful, as I don't see how a world that doesn't allow its people to do what they like as 'wonderful'.

Remakes are made because they SELL, and they sell because people LIKE them

(and of course because a sequel can build on an established working idea, instead of having the risk of not finding new solid ground)

You, sire, have a way to optimistic view of things. Sequels are a money grubbing tactic and result in the perpetual "or do they?" endings referenced in the movie. Games like Zelda and Mario and Final Fantasy had sequels because they were truly great games that had a market for revisits. And none of those titles readily interconnect from one to the next. Gears of War and F.E.A.R. and god knows what else have sequels because the companies don't want to spend money on developing new art and game-play, but still want to charge just as much for it.

People like them? People like what marketing tells them to like. End of story. (or is it? Check out the next post I may or may not make to find out for sure.)

Thanks for the compliment =)

You're right about the "it's not always artistic but marketing direction"-thingy that causes a lot of sequels. But, as an industry, money has to be made... (see above)

As for the latest quote, not entirely ;) People like what they like. Marketing makes sure people think the product is the thing they like (As in, marketing is not shaping what you like, but it is shaping what you think you like, or something)

Sewblon:
Banning sequels probably isn't worth losing half life 2, Civilization 3, and Super Mario Galaxy, but remakes should have the death penalty, preferably death by auto cannibalism.

I love remakes =)

yourbeliefs:

panthrjd:
Complaining about games that had cliff hangers for sequels that have no confirmation of getting made and he puts Beyond Good and Evil instead of The Longest Journey? Guess he never played the latter.

And doesn't Beyond Good and Evil sorta-kinda-maybe have an announced sequel?

Wasn't "Dreamfall" a sequel to TLJ? To be fair, "Dreamfall" ended on a cliffhanger too, which I wasn't exactly thrilled with when I had reached the end.

Yes, I was referring to "The Longest Journey" series in general, so yeah, the actual game would be Dreamfall that had the cliff hanger. The Longest Journey itself didn't end on a cliff hanger, if it was left alone, it would've been fine, I think.

Excelent review. To be honest I was hoping he'd like it considering how many of my friends love the game, but he tells it like it is and I respect/love it

Anaphyis:

Foreign Shadow:

Is Yahtzee making a crack about console gamers there? If not, my bad, but if so....I bring to your attention, Mr. Croshaw: Exhibit A: Any console controller of the last four generations save the Wii. Exhibit B: The keyboard and mouse on your PC. Scientific control: Prince of Persia: Sands of Time. I am a console gamer because every game that I have ever played that has ever required real-time control of a character is a hundred times less aggravating and a thousand times more enjoyable playing it with a console controller than a PC set up.

Taste and familiarization with a certain control scheme is pretty much the direct opposite of scientific. Also, there is a reason most successful console FPS have some kind of aiming assistance.

Third-Person -> Controller?
First-Person -> K&M?

sounds solid to me

Anaphyis:

Foreign Shadow:

Is Yahtzee making a crack about console gamers there? If not, my bad, but if so....I bring to your attention, Mr. Croshaw: Exhibit A: Any console controller of the last four generations save the Wii. Exhibit B: The keyboard and mouse on your PC. Scientific control: Prince of Persia: Sands of Time. I am a console gamer because every game that I have ever played that has ever required real-time control of a character is a hundred times less aggravating and a thousand times more enjoyable playing it with a console controller than a PC set up.

Taste and familiarization with a certain control scheme is pretty much the direct opposite of scientific. Also, there is a reason most successful console FPS have some kind of aiming assistance.

....have you even tried playing a platformer using the keyboard and mouse set-up? It's not simply a matter of taste and familiarization, it's a matter of design and ease of use. Many styles of game-play are simply much easier with a console controller than the keyboard. You can adapt to and use the keyboard-I've done it myself-but it's not as natural or intuitive as console controllers. I concede your point regarding FPS's though. I just don't really play them, so they don't enter into my calculations very often...

EDIT: And I see the poster directly above me has made an excellent point. Many First Person games use the Keyboard and Mouse set-up well. Since I regard nearly all First-Person games in the same way I regard rotten cheese in my fridge that is humming Sprach Zarathustra, you can see where my feelings on the matter come from..

I'm surprised you didn't emphasize how the endings a "*Tilts your Head to the side and exclaims* Ummm, wtf?!" It's entertaining if your looking to grind off some frustration on an AI that's tactical (by tactical I mean retard zerg rush)and predictable. The difficulties are laughable, if you can look and shoot at the same time, you'll burn through it quickly, even on the hardest mode, without the reflex crap.

Other than that, it's just rent-worthy for the easy late night achievement whoring.

Maybe having to do the quick time events is the horror element...

Doug:
Excellent review, and fortunately I don't seem to have missed out on anything by avoiding FEAR 2, just as I hoped.

Agreed. i tried the demo despite never playing FEAR 1 - any sense of terror the game might have evoked was overshadowed by my confusion at pretty much everything. "Okay, so here are some army looking guys and - wait, no, he's on the other side. Got it. Now - hold on, why is there a skull-head guy fighting WITH them. . .oh, i can flip this table to, nope, i forgot to throw that grenade i guess. Game over."

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here