FEAR or Quake4:Which will get your $50 1st?

Spare-Flair said:
Except that Unreal's single player was really revolutionary when Quake's was very poor.
And what was Quake III worth besides multiplayer and a good engine to sell?
Click to expand...

There was no difference in the single player, other than Unreal was longer, and there were more times in which you weren't shooting anything, it was quite boring.
 
Spare-Flair said:
Call of Duty 2

F.E.A.R. (though I love Monolith) is another emotion-manipulating single-player against all odds, CRATE-FEST. FEAR may have great AI and great psychological horror aspects, but not one thing about the game's settings have awed me. It's all bare warehouses, boring office halls, and metallic laboratories...Hmm, where have we seen those before? I'm sick of them!!!
Click to expand...

as opposed to the under-used bombed out european village setting?
 
FEAR already got my money to be in the multiplayer beta. I could have just put down $5 but whats the point? Hopefully when I go to pick it up a nice copy of Quake4 will be there. :D
 
F.E.A.R will be. No doubt about that. I'm absolutely in love with the demo (I've played it at least 10 times). What would make the final version so kick ass, would be to have the story mode be done in a co-op fashion as well as yourself. but with this, they have to put in at least two new difficulty settings.
 
Well the 18th is next Tuesday and I did not preorder yet. ooops! I just thought that I could pick up copy of Q4 at my nearest Gamestop and pick up a copy, Q4 may sell out fast.

I am crazy about Q3, UT and UT2004. So if Q4 is much of the same I will be very happy. I did not play Q1 or Q2, I wonder if it is worth it to pick those up and give them a try. I will check the Quake website about an XP patch for those older titles.

If PC Gamer is correct that Q4 sux... :( :mad:

At least the devs of FEAR attempted to give gamers a different premise, I hope it works.

Well what ever you spend your $50 on next Tuesday, it will be a great day for gamers.
 
Not sure, I'm leaning towards Quake 4 right now, but still confused.
 
Ballz2TheWallz said:
considering my 6800gt struggles on 1024x768


fear can stick a dick in its ass
Click to expand...

Shut soft shadows off. Seems no one likes to tweak. Riddick wouldn't run in PS2.0++ mode @1024 when my 6800GT was practically fresh on the streets (OC'd <5% between it and top end at the time), for the same reason. Keeping it on I'd still lag a little at low res, so why not get go without SS, with the benefit of cranking the res way further, and no lag! So I know how it feels, but it ended up being practically unnoticable. Seems every game is coming with HDR or soft shadows or some hard to pull feature, while the games still look magnificent tweaked.

They say not to run FEAR beyond 1024*768. But with 1 GTX and soft shadows off I can do 1920*1200. :eek: Graphics is going to be a tough game extremely quick. As we go on, even if we maintain twice the power, twice the "wow" factor moves further and further away. Just to maintain more realistic shadows, light blinding you through the window, and the like.
 
F.E.A.R. is definitely getting my $50. I just read the Quake 4 review in PC Gamer and loled @ it. I keep hearing the Q4 MP is going to be like Q3 which sickens me. I was hoping for better.
 
I also relalised that Age of Empires III will be coming out the 18th aswell. 3 huge titles on the same day, lol.
 
I'll probably get both, but if I had to choose.... then it would be F.E.A.R.
I've been looking forward to it for the longest time.

Demo runs fine on my system (but then again I have 2x 6800GT ^_^ )
 
Definately F.E.A.R. After playing the single-player demo and seeing how awesome the visual effects and level of action is, it's got my money. Say what you want, but I'm going to wait until it hits $35 before I buy it. By then, I should have a better video card in my rig.
 
Quake 4

I want to help fund Carmack's personal quest for fame with his rockets or help him buy another Lamborghini. lol

Quake's have all rocked, I hope # 4 keeps with the tradition.

(hope its not a disappointment like Doom3)

Why don't you just download it on P2P. Look for Q4_gold_source.exe

j/k!
 
FEAR for me I think. Both appeal but that just looks better in my opinion (and hopefully I can pick up Q4 second hand later on).
 
texuspete00 said:
Shut soft shadows off. Seems no one likes to tweak. Riddick wouldn't run in PS2.0++ mode @1024 when my 6800GT was practically fresh on the streets (OC'd <5% between it and top end at the time), for the same reason. Keeping it on I'd still lag a little at low res, so why not get go without SS, with the benefit of cranking the res way further, and no lag! So I know how it feels, but it ended up being practically unnoticable. Seems every game is coming with HDR or soft shadows or some hard to pull feature, while the games still look magnificent tweaked.

They say not to run FEAR beyond 1024*768. But with 1 GTX and soft shadows off I can do 1920*1200. :eek: Graphics is going to be a tough game extremely quick. As we go on, even if we maintain twice the power, twice the "wow" factor moves further and further away. Just to maintain more realistic shadows, light blinding you through the window, and the like.
Click to expand...
i didnt pay $400 so i cant have my shadows,i have no problems with shadows in any other game
 
The shadows are still going to be there, they just aren't going to be as..."soft". It's just the difference between blurred, slightly more realistic shadows and shadows with harder less realistic edges. It's not THAT big a difference, and it really destroys your framerate.
 
I am going to buy FEAR and have fun with it while I wait for a Q4 Demo. I probabbly won't end up buying Q4.
 
i admitt fears amazing with medium shadows



but still....the jaggies :( ,what are the settings you guys would reccomend for the SP demo for a 3000+a64 6800gt 1gb pc3200
 
My son had a rig with P4 2.8,6800GT, 1 GB value Ram and his demo looked good at 1024x768, no soft shadows and all the rest determined by the program. It looked cool, ran smooth and had all the particle effects. I would guess 4xAA, medium on everything else.....sorry but its been a while since I played the demo
I have to admit that even with my SLI comp, I have to limit the res to 1 step below 1600x1200 with everything else on high. If I go to 16x12 I get some pretty big framerate hits. :(
 
I have to say both Quake and Fear will get my money. To close to call so I will just buy both of them :cool:
 
FlatLine84 said:
There was no difference in the single player, other than Unreal was longer, and there were more times in which you weren't shooting anything, it was quite boring.
Click to expand...

wrong

Unreal had awsome environments and atmostphere compared to quake games
The level design was amazing.
The level variety was amazing.
The music was amazing.
The graphics were way beyond anything at the time.
Didnt find it boring, found it challenging, found it interesting at all times.

I love quake games, but unreal sp was beyond any of them.
 
bbeach said:
wrong

Unreal had awsome environments and atmostphere compared to quake games
The level design was amazing.
The level variety was amazing.
The music was amazing.
The graphics were way beyond anything at the time.
Didnt find it boring, found it challenging, found it interesting at all times.

I love quake games, but unreal sp was beyond any of them.
Click to expand...

I disagree, yeah the levels were vast in some place from landscape point of view, but I remember many times I'd be trucking around those areas, not really ever encounter a bad guy, let a lone a hard one. So yeah I guess it's nice to look at CGI landscapes, but I'm playing a game.

You do have a point on level variety, that has been a nice thing about Unreal games, is the different settings.

For a company that used in house music, it was quite good, fit the atmosphere of the game. But Nine Inch Nails was quite a bit better IMO, and Q3's sonic mayhem and front line assembley were much more dark, and achieved a feel I really was looking for.

Graphics were decent, but no better than quake or quake 2, especially once there was GLquake.

Unreal was sort of challange for me, but it didn't take me long to finish, and I just got bored wondering around, AI has never done anything for me unless it is a run and gun type thing where the action is constant, just because AI blows in any game. I play against real people too often to enjoy single player anymore as much as I did with Doom, Quake and Unreal.
 
Will someone please make a countdown untill the day that I can run to the Best Buy and pick up a copy of FEAR?

I am SSSOOOOoooo bored with CS, BRING ON THE FEAR!

And bring on the Quake4 demo!!
 
Yea I'm hoping for a Quake 4 Demo before it's release, but I doubt that'll happen.
 
DeathCloud said:
I have to say both Quake and Fear will get my money. To close to call so I will just buy both of them :cool:
Click to expand...

I'm on the fence as well, so I'll just end up getting them both instead of deciding.
 
Ballz2TheWallz said:
considering my 6800gt struggles on 1024x768


fear can stick a dick in its ass
Click to expand...

1156x864 runs fine for me, and I may add it looks better than 90% of other FPSes at that res (the others running in 1600x1200). From the SP and MP demos, this has my favorite graphical engine.
 
Can someone tell me if Q4 is a OGL or DirectX game?

Can someone tell me if FEAR is a OGL or DirectX game?




What is on the Special Edition DVD?
In addition to Quake IV:

* Quake II PC
* Quake II: Reckoning PC Expansion Pack
* Quake II: Ground Zero PC Expansion Pack
* Behind The Scenes Making of Quake IV
* Interviews with id and Raven Software
* Concept and Production Art Gallery
http://www.planetquake.com/quake4/info.shtml
 
davidj said:
Can someone tell me if Q4 is a OGL or DirectX game?

Can someone tell me if FEAR is a OGL or DirectX game?




What is on the Special Edition DVD?
In addition to Quake IV:

* Quake II PC
* Quake II: Reckoning PC Expansion Pack
* Quake II: Ground Zero PC Expansion Pack
* Behind The Scenes Making of Quake IV
* Interviews with id and Raven Software
* Concept and Production Art Gallery
http://www.planetquake.com/quake4/info.shtml
Click to expand...
Q4 is of course OpenGL. I'm not sure about FEAR....offhand i'd say no, but it would be nice if it did support it. OpenGL runs so much smoother on NV cards.
 
Quake 4 and AOE III for me

Dying for some new real time strategy, even if there are many similarities to AOE II (a positive for me)
 
Its going to be Quake 4 for mew, since the FEAR DEMO runs sooo slow on my laptop. It reads of the harddrive so very much its unplayable. All other games incl Doom3 run with no problems and killer graphics but not FEAR. So Quake 4 for me :)
 
FlatLine84 said:
I disagree, yeah the levels were vast in some place from landscape point of view, but I remember many times I'd be trucking around those areas, not really ever encounter a bad guy, let a lone a hard one. So yeah I guess it's nice to look at CGI landscapes, but I'm playing a game.

You do have a point on level variety, that has been a nice thing about Unreal games, is the different settings.

For a company that used in house music, it was quite good, fit the atmosphere of the game. But Nine Inch Nails was quite a bit better IMO, and Q3's sonic mayhem and front line assembley were much more dark, and achieved a feel I really was looking for.

Graphics were decent, but no better than quake or quake 2, especially once there was GLquake.

Unreal was sort of challange for me, but it didn't take me long to finish, and I just got bored wondering around, AI has never done anything for me unless it is a run and gun type thing where the action is constant, just because AI blows in any game. I play against real people too often to enjoy single player anymore as much as I did with Doom, Quake and Unreal.
Click to expand...

What's fun is reading old reviews on Unreal and seeing how much the experience has changed. I admit, Unreal was better in my memory than it actually was but still, it was better than Quake and revolutionary until Half-Life turned the genre on it's head.

http://www.avault.com/reviews/review_temp.asp?game=unreal&page=2

"That slap comes during the opening moments of the second level, when you emerge from the tight confines of the starship to a spacious outdoor scene filled with an incredible feast of real-world detail. It is a defining moment for the genre, when we break free from the tight, claustrophobic passages that have defined the geometry of 3D games since day one and enter a brave, new world. Clouds and birds move with gradual intent under shining suns and distant moons, towering cliffs reach toward a far-off visual summit, and a waterfall descends to a rippling lake. On a smaller scale, insects buzz above swampish water, moss creeps up the sides of cliffs, schools of fish inspect all entrants into their underwater domain, and small, rabbit-like animals bound about in search of food. The starship from which you have escaped, which has burrowed into the surface, provides a striking counterpoint to this organic scene; you are given a convincing sense that this is a real world, filled with function and purpose, and that you do not belong. To be honest, other 3D titles seem stiff in comparison to this striking scene."

Then you realize all this breath-taking beauty he's describing is:
unreal196uv.jpg

unreal209jl.jpg


But back in those days, this was truely groundbreaking, at much as it was for me to actually swim underwater in Duke Nukem. And well, at least it wasn't all Quake black and brown.

Then later he describes the sequence where you are pretty much helpless and being chased by a monster through the mines: "The effect of being rushed and pursued by an artificial opponent is mind-altering."

And I immediately realized that THIS IS EXACTLY what has been missing from games. FPS games are now so boringly scripted to you as the main character walking from room to room and shooting guys who are already there, or confronting enemies that are already there. You are always the hunter. There are no sequences where you are weaponless or defenseless, and basically have to run for your life from whatever the hell is chasing you. In modern games, even if it's the meanest and most frightening of monsters, or enemy agents, you just have to shoot back as fast as you can.

The closest thing was in HL1 where you had to escape from the giant monster which you had to call an airstrike on. F.E.A.R. wants to scare you by playing with your mind. It's a house of mirrors or a haunted house with bloody walls and spooky girls and shadows and screams. But I think the most primal fear of all, is being chased, hunted by an animal, and feeling helpless, like you just have to run, throw obstacles in the way, do things perfectly on the first try, try to evade capture or being killed. I think that would really help games to exploit that again.

I'm tired of surmountable odds. If there are 50 soldiers, you are expected to be able to kill them, not just run away with your life - which btw, always happens in movies. James Bond isn't killing every enemy solider, he's running for his life with the secret plans, etc. He can't reasonably expect to take out every soldier, he's just skiing for his life or driving for his life.
 
On Quake IV:

Unlike previous installments, single-player is there in a big way, with a winding plot, a cast of characters voiced by Hollywood actors, objective-based gameplay, light squad tactics, and countless set pieces. In fact, so much effort was put into the single-player presentation that the amount of multiplayer seems to have suffered as a result.
Click to expand...

Source: http://pc.ign.com/articles/658/658263p1.html
 
yay ..just ordered FEAR and SS2 from the egg ...oh the anticipation ..I wait with baited breath ...or something like that ..


:)

..but I'll get QIV when its available as well ...yay for having a job!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top