F.E.A.R. Perseus Mandate Demo Released


Now available at FileShack is the F.E.A.R. Perseus Mandate demo, for those of you interested in trying this new stand-alone expansion pack where you play as a different F.E.A.R. soldier, encountering enemies never seen by the team in the original game. The 735mb demo includes the Underground level. Developed by TimeGate Studios, F.E.A.R. Perseus Mandate is due out November 6. It will also be part of the F.E.A.R. Files release for Xbox 360, which includes Perseus Mandate and the earlier expansion pack Extraction Point.

Filed Under
From The Chatty
  • reply
    October 9, 2007 1:59 PM

    Its still kind of fun to play but holy shit the graphics are bad

    • reply
      October 9, 2007 2:01 PM

      I'm just not as interested since Monolith isn't doing this one. I'll check the demo out I suppose, but I'm looking more forward to Project Origin.

    • reply
      October 9, 2007 2:03 PM

      Yeah, it's all about artwork and implementation. The FEAR engine can look really good in the right hands.

    • reply
      October 9, 2007 2:09 PM

      I was really surprised when I installed NOLF 2 after running FEAR to discover that NOLF 2, running on a previous generation of Lithtech, is a much more attractive game.

      • reply
        October 9, 2007 2:12 PM

        much broader and brighter range of colors though.

        FEAR was designed with a dark, spooky palette rather than a hip, bright 60's sensation of colors

        • reply
          October 9, 2007 2:13 PM

          TLDR - your gay

        • reply
          October 9, 2007 2:42 PM

          FEAR was designed with the most repetitive "art style" ever, a grey color palette that is even more monotonous than Doom 3´s...and that is an achievement on it´s own. Apparently with Project Origin Lith wanted to carry on that legacy, although they managed to make the levels look better than barren boxes for firefights. Seriously, i consider the levels in FEAR to be some of the worst ever created for an FPS game.
          Awesome combat though.

          • reply
            October 9, 2007 3:55 PM

            Some of the worst ever created for an FPS game? Hah! I beg to differ.

      • reply
        October 9, 2007 2:15 PM

        Man I want NOFL :(

      • reply
        October 9, 2007 2:34 PM

        Not really. Good art style on NOLF2, though.

        • reply
          October 9, 2007 3:04 PM

          I often observe that the way a game looks is affected by one's knowledge of its polygon counts. Let go of the polygon counts for the moment and just look at the visuals. NOLF 2 > FEAR.

          • reply
            October 9, 2007 3:23 PM

            This sounds more like an intro speech for a meditation session than a serious comment on graphical rendering. Like it or not, technical proficiency is (as would seem obvious to me!) a part of graphical output, and while the relative weighing of stylistic and technical aspects is subjective, it's rather judgmental to say that one side has no effect at all on "the visuals."

            In addition, FEAR has more graphical advantages over games from 2002 than polygon count. Its lighting system and particle generation are still fairly first-class today, actually.

            • reply
              October 9, 2007 3:37 PM

              To the contrary, a game's visuals should stop getting constantly dissected into a sum of their parts. If you were to show NOLF 2 and FEAR side by side to someone who is not tech-savvy, they would clearly point out NOLF 2 as an overall winner.

              I don't care if your engine can do specular quadrant zit-mapping with subpixel precision, if all you produce with it are drab, neverending, inorganic, square-looking office cubicle environments. The end result is what matters. The SUM of all parts.

              • reply
                October 9, 2007 4:37 PM

                If you were to show NOLF 2 and FEAR side by side to someone who is not tech-savvy, they would clearly point out NOLF 2 as an overall winner.

                I used to think this, until I showed Wind Waker to my girlfriend and she remarked "the graphics aren't very good, are they". Now I don't know what to think.

                • reply
                  October 9, 2007 4:59 PM

                  You showed her Wind Waker and asked her to compare it to what ?

                  • reply
                    October 9, 2007 5:32 PM

                    I didn't ask for a comparison (I don't remember even really soliciting an opinion). I just felt it was an (anecdotal) example of an instance where a poor polygon budget had outshone a great art style, despite zero/minimal exposure to the "more polygons/buzzwords must mean it looks better" meme.

                    • reply
                      October 9, 2007 5:47 PM

                      Taking my example to the extreme and then stripping it of its relativity does not make for a convincing argument .

                      But I get it... you have a girlfriend ;)

                      • reply
                        October 9, 2007 6:20 PM

                        Oh I didn't mean to present an argument. I just found that, for me, it throws interesting ambiguity into what is normally a rather stale debate.

    • reply
      October 9, 2007 2:50 PM

      I think this goes down in history as the most uneccessary screenshot ever released. http://www.shacknews.com/screenshots.x?gallery=8485&game_id=4511&id=106964

      seriously. I couldnt purposely compose a duller shot.

      • reply
        October 9, 2007 2:56 PM

        haha nah I took all those shots, and that one just to point out the dull architecture

        • reply
          October 10, 2007 9:06 AM

          well done, then! I stand corrected in my opinion of it. it does its job well!

      • reply
        October 9, 2007 3:43 PM

        Whats? That screenshot makes it an insta-purchase!

    • reply
      October 9, 2007 3:22 PM

      I think it's because there's not much 'stuff' lying around. We're spoiled by Bioshock.

Hello, Meet Lola