Quake4 vs FEAR?

Executioner · Post by **Executioner** » Sun Oct 23, 2005 5:09 pm

I have both of these games running on my "old" system:
P4 2.4GHz cpu
1 gig of ram
ATI 9600 Pro

The graphics on FEAR don't seem that great to me compared to other games like HL2 and Far Cry. I have it set for 800x600. I haven't tried anything higher yet as I'm afraid my card will not be able to handle it.

Quake4 is in the same boat - I have it set at 800x600 with medium quality setting. The graphics on Quake4 seem better to me than in FEAR.

After playing both of these, Quake4 seems to have the edge in my book.

123cool · Post by **123cool** » Sun Oct 23, 2005 5:29 pm

havnt palyed both and only played the demo in FEAR, which the graphics are great at 1280*1024, even though it does take up a lot of resorces and is really slugish in some parts it jumps, at the default settings for my system 640*480(lol) it looks like the first doom game.

P.S

that hallway thing is just freaky.

Karchiveur · Post by **Karchiveur** » Sun Oct 23, 2005 5:47 pm

Originally posted by 123cool
havnt palyed both and only played the demo in FEAR, which the graphics are great at 1280*1024, even though it does take up a lot of resorces and is really slugish in some parts it jumps, at the default settings for my system 640*480(lol) it looks like the first doom game.

P.S

that hallway thing is just freaky.

haha yeah, that little girl is creepy

RubberDuckie · Post by **RubberDuckie** » Sun Oct 23, 2005 7:06 pm

Playing FEAR now. Runing it at 1024 with everything on High.
Looks great, but Im unimpressed with the map models. How come every game these days have to be so damn dark.

Its creapy, but I have heard short.

Ready for Call of Duty 2 this wednesday

Executioner · Post by **Executioner** » Sun Oct 23, 2005 7:18 pm

Originally posted by RubberDuckie
Playing FEAR now. Runing it at 1024 with everything on High.
Looks great, but Im unimpressed with the map models. How come every game these days have to be so damn dark.

Its creapy, but I have heard short.

Ready for Call of Duty 2 this wednesday

Even in Quake4, they have lighted areas, but are still too dark IMHO. I crancked mine to 1024x768 in medium quality, but the game slows way down for me. Works OK though at 800x600 medium quality.

As for FEAR, I agree. The map models are not that great if you compare them to HL2. Seems to me that HL2 is the new standard to beat in image quality, but Fry Cry was excellent also.

MAC · Post by **MAC** » Sun Oct 23, 2005 11:21 pm

I played the FEAR demo with my old graphics card (GeForce 4 Ti4400) and it ran ok. I haven't purchased the full version. I've been playing Quake 4 since Saturday using a new GeForce 6600 GT. Plays geat at 800 x 600 Medium quality.

MAC.

EvilHorace · Post by **EvilHorace** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 5:38 am

Q4 looks and runs great on my desktop PC at 1280X1024, high quality. I think I'll hold off on Fear until I've played through all of Q4 singleplayer or I probably won't finish it. I never finished Q2 singleplayer.
For those who didn't like Q3 because it was basically a multiplayer only game (besides bots), Q4 is an improvement.

EvilHorace · Post by **EvilHorace** » Thu Oct 27, 2005 5:51 am

Anyone with Q4 not liking it?
I'm really impressed. The game rocks in singleplayer, lots of fun and far better than previous Quake games IMO.
I havent tryed it multiplayer yet but then I havent played any game online in ages really so I don't care. I'm usually OK with playing multiplayer games like Q3, UT '04 with bots rather than playing online with real people.

Executioner · Post by **Executioner** » Thu Oct 27, 2005 9:07 am

Yeah I really like it. I think it's much better than FEAR, which I think is a big disappointment.

Key Keeper · Post by **Key Keeper** » Sat Oct 29, 2005 1:22 am

Originally posted by 123cool
havnt palyed both and only played the demo in FEAR, which the graphics are great at 1280*1024

I bought FEAR a few days ago and I dont get the option of running the resolution that high. 1280x960 is the highest I can turn it. As for the graphics, @1024x768 they are awesome. After an hour of game play I have to lower the clock speed on my cards gpu's, cause of the green squares that start to appear.

Vid card settings (in game):
AA off
soft shadows off
anisotropic: 4x

all other settings: Maximum

These are the settings after "auto detect" is used

HitDoS · Post by **HitDoS** » Thu Nov 03, 2005 3:31 pm

I am enjoying Quake 4 ALOT more than I thought I would. The single-player experience has been very satisfying. But if I had to choose between Quake 4 and F.E.A.R., I would have to go with FEAR.

It may not have great level design or the best graphics, but the creep factor along with having some of absolute best enemy AI I have ever fought, make it the winner between the two for me.

No fight has been the same with the clone soldiers, even if I replay the same skirmish. It is like I am fighting a real squad of people, not an enemy programmed to charge me. And when I mean 'real', I mean real as in the teamwork of a squad of soldiers in the rules of the world of FEAR...not the online playing of some 12 year old bunny-hopping across the room shooting rockets at me.

EvilHorace · Post by **EvilHorace** » Fri Nov 04, 2005 6:32 am

I finished Q4 and enjoyed it all the way through. Great game! It's fun online too.
I've bought and installed FEAR now but havent yet had the time to play it, soon I hope.

MegaVectra · Post by **MegaVectra** » Fri Nov 04, 2005 8:57 am

Quake 4 to me is just Q3 with better graphics. I just don't enjoy the run and gun game types any more. I prefer COD 2, especially on the tactical realism servers.

Busby · Post by **Busby** » Fri Nov 04, 2005 10:06 am

Quake 4 is MUCH slower than Quake 3. The physics feel completely different. Both games seem to have appealing aspects. FEAR is creepy while Quake 4 is like a standard issue single-player FPS.

Post by **FlyingPenguin** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 9:41 am

I bought FEAR the other day and played an hour of single player. This is one scary game. Hairs are standing up on the back of my neck the whole time.