F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin

About

F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin is a single player and multiplayer shooter game with a horror theme. It was developed by Monolith and was released on February 12, 2009. It received mostly positive reviews from critics and positive reviews from players.

In F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin, assume the role of Special Forces Sgt. Michael Becket and navigate through an apocalyptic landscape following a disastrous explosion. Engage in intense combat against new enemies, utilizing slowed time and environmental interactions to your advantage. Unravel a terrifying mystery as you confront new characters and face the growing power of Alma Wade.

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Skip User Reviews

81%

Audience ScoreBased on 4,789 reviews

story541 positive mentions

stability45 negative mentions

The game features improved graphics and sound design compared to the original, enhancing the overall atmosphere.
The combat mechanics, including the slow-motion feature, provide a satisfying shooting experience.
The story expands on Alma's backstory and includes some memorable horror moments, particularly in the school level.

The AI is significantly less intelligent than in the first game, making encounters feel less challenging.
The removal of the leaning mechanic and the introduction of a cover system detracts from the tactical gameplay.
The game is shorter than the original and some story elements feel disjointed or underdeveloped.

story
1,903 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
28%
65%
7%
The story of "F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin" is a mixed bag, with many players noting its artistic cutscenes and improved presentation compared to the first game, but also criticizing its lack of depth and coherence. While some appreciated the expansion of lore surrounding the character Alma and the horror elements, others found the plot predictable and the characters forgettable, leading to a less engaging experience overall. The game is often described as a linear shooter with a serviceable story that fails to reach the emotional weight or complexity of its predecessor, leaving many players feeling conflicted about its narrative execution.
- “The story is excellent, as expected from Monolith Productions.”
- “The eerie encounters with Alma are creepier than ever, and the story expands the series’ mystery in exciting ways.”
- “The story is much better; you actually understand what's going on without reading audio logs, which is amazing.”
- “However, there is little standalone value in the story itself, since the characters and the dialogues between them are bland and quickly forgotten.”
- “The plot and characters get the job done; they move things forward, but they never quite reach the depth or emotional weight that could have elevated the experience.”
- “The story tries to be more ambitious, but it ends up being its weakest link.”
gameplay
1,004 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
32%
60%
8%
The gameplay in "F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin" has received mixed reviews, with many players noting a shift towards a more action-oriented style compared to its predecessor. While the return of the slow-motion mechanic and improved gunplay are praised, the removal of tactical elements like the leaning mechanic and the introduction of less effective cover systems have led to a perception of the gameplay as more generic and less engaging. Overall, while some enjoy the streamlined mechanics and new features, others feel it lacks the depth and horror elements that made the first game memorable.
- “The gameplay is fun overall, the music is still great and bullet-time is still a fun mechanic.”
- “The combat feels fluid, especially with the satisfying slow-motion mechanic, and enemy AI is surprisingly clever, making battles genuinely exciting.”
- “The gameplay is solid and the mix of slow-mo powers along with high levels of combat and gunfights are kept in f.e.a.r.”
- “The gameplay of Fear 2 on the surface level always seemed like a big downgrade from the first to me, and others' word of mouth didn't make it seem any better either.”
- “The combat went from carefully designed encounters, where good use of slow-mo and careful aiming get rewarded, to clown car monster closets from which enemies pour out by the dozens while you are limited to some half-assed cover shooter mechanics, which for some reason lack the ability to lean like its predecessor already had.”
- “The gameplay has been completely butchered, and even though most of the weapon arsenal is back, it feels unbalanced, in most cases unimpactful and weak.”
graphics
844 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
35%
60%
5%
The graphics in "F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin" are generally regarded as a significant improvement over its predecessor, showcasing enhanced visual fidelity, detailed environments, and better lighting effects that still hold up well today. However, many players feel that the game's aesthetic shift towards a brighter, more sterile look detracts from the original's atmospheric horror, leading to a mixed reception regarding the overall visual experience. While the graphics are praised for their quality, some critiques highlight a loss of the unique charm and immersive tension that characterized the first game.
- “The graphics are excellent for its time.”
- “The visuals are impressive for a game that released in 2009, offering clean presentation and smooth performance that make firefights both cinematic and satisfying.”
- “The graphics, character models, environmental details, lighting, and overall atmosphere have all been significantly enhanced, creating a more vivid and immersive world.”
- “The graphics are weaker and blurry, the physics are worse, and the horror is almost absent.”
- “The graphics and the style of the game just feel off to me somehow and everything feels smaller and 'zoomed in' compared to the first one; it's kind of odd.”
- “The graphics are a mixed bag; while they are improved, they lack the atmospheric depth and interaction found in the first game.”
atmosphere
472 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
50%
44%
6%
The atmosphere in "F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin" has received mixed reviews, with many players noting a significant downgrade compared to its predecessor. While some moments, particularly in specific levels like the elementary school, deliver a creepy and immersive experience, the overall tone has shifted towards a more action-oriented approach, often sacrificing the oppressive horror atmosphere that defined the first game. Enhanced graphics and sound design contribute positively, but the reliance on jump scares and a brighter aesthetic detracts from the game's ability to maintain a consistent sense of dread.
- “The atmosphere is incredibly immersive, with eerie environments and a haunting soundtrack that keeps you on edge.”
- “The eerie soundtrack and sound effects add to the unsettling atmosphere and enhance the overall experience.”
- “The atmosphere, the sudden jump scares, the eerie audio design — it had me constantly on edge.”
- “The overall atmosphere is just not the same.”
- “The atmosphere has also been downgraded by brighter lighting, quieter noises, and wider/more open spaces.”
- “It feels like a generic low-grade military shooter with some 'spooky stuff'; gunplay is extremely boring, and atmosphere just doesn't work, it feels cheap and forced.”
music
212 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
33%
60%
7%
The music in the game receives mixed reviews, with many praising its quality and atmospheric contributions, particularly in enhancing tension and immersion. However, some players criticize the reliance on recycled tracks from the original game, leading to a sense of forgettability and a lack of innovation. Overall, while the soundtrack is noted for its effectiveness in certain moments, it does not consistently match the haunting quality of its predecessor.
- “The atmosphere is incredibly immersive, with eerie environments and a haunting soundtrack that keeps you on edge.”
- “The soundtrack is excellent, reusing several tracks from the previous game, but in a way that feels fitting to this new one.”
- “The music is solid atmospheric stuff that I wouldn't exactly listen to without the context of the game, but works well when combined with it.”
- “The soundtrack is honestly kinda forgettable and the sound configuration is a bit of a headache to adjust unless you have a 5.1 surround sound compatible device.”
- “The audio in this game is really bad, not only does it have some horrible music in some sections, but the enemy shotguns sound closer to a weak fart than a gunshot, expect to get killed a lot by them in hard difficulty as they are completely drowned out by your own guns, and it's made even worse by the 'deafened' effect every explosion causes.”
- “The music mostly just exists, and aside from a single track from the final mission, no song really stood out to me.”
optimization
59 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
31%
59%
10%
The optimization of the game has received mixed reviews, with some players praising its smooth performance and good graphics, particularly on modern hardware, while others criticize it for feeling like a console port with inconsistent framerates and various performance issues. Many users noted that while some optimization is present, particularly with in-game settings, significant problems still exist, often requiring external fixes or adjustments to achieve satisfactory performance. Overall, the game's optimization appears to be a hit-or-miss experience, depending on the player's system and settings.
- “The visuals are impressive for its time, offering clean presentation and smooth performance that make firefights both cinematic and satisfying.”
- “The game is, however, for the most part optimized, and you don't need to install a file to make sure your fps isn't stuck at 20. The game runs really smooth and I rarely had problems with fps, even during combat in wide open intense environments with a lot of enemies. It's not perfectly optimized, but it's good enough. With max settings at 1080p, you should be able to get 60+ fps easily with no drops below that on most modern computers.”
- “Graphics are really nice, the game seems to be well optimized.”
- “Everything about it yells 'console port' with no PC optimization.”
- “The optimization of this game...oh, what I'm talking about, this game's not optimized at all, it's worth buying this game from third-party websites, where it costs much cheaper, do not ever buy that from the store, it's not worth 15 euros at all.”
- “I really don't know how such performance issues are possible with modern machines.”
humor
56 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The humor in the game is a mixed bag, with some players finding it genuinely funny through clever dialogue, humorous easter eggs, and amusing ragdoll physics, while others criticize it for cringeworthy attempts at humor and disjointed dialogue. Many appreciate the light-hearted moments that break up the gameplay, though the overall tone can feel inconsistent. Despite its flaws, the humor often adds a unique charm that resonates with players, making for memorable experiences.
- “There's a bunch of small and insignificant details in the map that give a lively feeling, with humor and jokes here and there.”
- “A lot of great moments and a hilarious ending.”
- “The sounds are nice, it has some creepy moments and also some funny easter eggs, the level design is nice.”
stability
55 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
16%
2%
82%
The game's stability has received mixed reviews, with many players reporting significant bugs and glitches that hinder gameplay, such as random crashes, graphical issues, and gameplay mechanics failing to function properly. While some users noted that the game runs smoothly on certain systems without major problems, the overall consensus indicates that it is plagued by instability, particularly in later levels, making for a frustrating experience for many.
- “The game runs great without needing any mods like the first piece of junk did.”
- “It works, it's not too buggy, the hit detection isn't broken, and the audio doesn't randomly cut out.”
- “Masterfully executed level design, stunning kill animations, horrifying visuals and ambiance, it came out ready to play with all of the advertised multiplayer modes, and last but not least - bug free.”
- “The story became dodgy, the gameplay became buggy and slow, and the movement even started getting issues where on platforms you'd rubber band around.”
- “Fear 2 is a buggy mess... maps not loading, random crashes, and having to replay certain sections because of it is frustrating.”
- “The game is good but, like the previous one, had some glitches and bugs; the most annoying one was the missing textures.”
grinding
36 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
3%
8%
89%
Overall, players find the grinding aspect of the game to be tedious and repetitive, with many noting a lack of enemy variety and uninspired level design that leads to a monotonous gameplay experience. The combat, while initially engaging, becomes a chore as players face the same types of enemies repeatedly, often exacerbated by frustrating mechanics like poor checkpoint systems and a lack of impactful gunplay. Many reviewers express that the game feels more like a grind than an enjoyable challenge, particularly on higher difficulties.
- “You'll need a second life for grinding.”
- “The gameplay is mostly okay, but gets boring and tedious as you go through it.”
- “Guns lack any semblance of impact or weight, making the whole journey a boring, slow, tedious chore.”
- “Now, rather than coming into an area where all or most of the enemies are already present, you get a long, tedious parade of one, two, or three enemies at a time, each spawning out of nowhere as you dispatch their predecessors.”
replayability
34 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
29%
56%
15%
Overall, the game's replayability is generally viewed as limited, with many players noting that once the single-player campaign is completed, there is little incentive to return. While some mention the addition of multiplayer modes and achievements as potential boosts to replay value, the linearity of the game and lack of meaningful choices significantly detract from its long-term engagement. Ratings for replayability vary, but many hover around the low to mid-range, indicating that while the game may be enjoyable for a one-time playthrough, it lacks the depth for repeated experiences.
- “The multiplayer mode is a welcome addition, providing an additional layer of replayability to an already engaging single-player campaign.”
- “This is a nice addition that can provide more replay value.”
- “This is one of the most replayable shooters ever.”
- “Beyond unlocking in-game achievements, I don't think there is a lot of replayability due to how linear the game is.”
- “The lackluster sound design, graphics, and total lack of replayability don't actually detract from the enjoyment all that much, but they're still worth mentioning.”
- “There's about 8 hours of gameplay here that starts to overstay its welcome near the late game areas and it doesn't have much replay value.”
emotional
26 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
81%
19%
The emotional aspect of the game received mixed reviews, with some players appreciating the improved character animations and depth, particularly praising the villain Vaduk for his expressiveness. However, many felt that the plot lacked the emotional weight and coherence needed to create a truly impactful experience, leading to feelings of emptiness and distraction throughout the game. Overall, while there were moments of potential emotional engagement, they were often overshadowed by a tedious gameplay experience and a lackluster story.
- “This sequel is just amazing, has more emotional depth than the first game.”
- “The timegate expansions were okay, but they didn't do nearly as good a job as conveying the heartbreaking story of Alma.”
- “The ending just made me feel empty and you could very easily see it coming from how everything was playing out.”
- “Very generic linear post-apocalyptic shooter with 8 different types of guns and a boring story they hide the plot of until a line of dialogue thrown in the middle of gameplay. Not even a cutscene, then there is no ending; the game's just over, not even much of a cliffhanger to make you want to play a sequel.”
monetization
26 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
12%
88%
The monetization aspect of the game has drawn mixed reactions, with many players perceiving it as a cash grab that prioritizes modern features like aim down sights (ADS) over the tactical depth and immersive elements of earlier titles. While some appreciate the inclusion of ADS and other mechanics, others criticize the game for feeling generic and overly simplified, detracting from the original's horror and gameplay experience. Overall, the consensus suggests that the monetization strategy has led to a focus on mainstream shooter trends at the expense of the franchise's unique identity.
- “All you've done is made a lazy story, took all tactical depth out of combat, and made the most generic shooter possible in what feels like just another cash grab.”
- “Oh yeah, and they replaced the zoom feature with ads because every game has to have aim down sights in the 7th generation; stupid choice.”
- “R and how now they have gravitated to singleplayer skip the game microtransactions bullcrap, the consensus seemed to agree.”
character development
9 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
22%
45%
33%
Character development in the game has received mixed reviews, with some players expressing disappointment due to a lack of depth and growth among characters, particularly given the game's short length. While a few noted moments of strong character design and plot involvement, many felt that the overall development was insufficient, especially as many characters are quickly eliminated. Overall, the game struggles to provide meaningful character arcs, leaving players wanting more.
- “The story was great, even the end but really it was well put together, spun off of the last game quite well and had crazy good character development.”
- “No, not really. I think the gunplay is probably the worst of the three main games in the series and felt very arcadey, like it was trying to become a console-only game, but the story and character development, as well as some pretty good horror scenes, are where this game really shines.”
- “No character development at all.”
- “Your squad has a lot more to do in the plot, but sadly due to the game’s short length, there’s not a lot of room for character development.”
- “And of course, there is no character development from any characters that you encountered, as the majority of them die off quickly.”

Skip Critic Reviews

73%Critics’ scoreBased on 5 critic reviews

Skip Game Offers

Buy F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin

7h Median play time

36h Average play time

7h Main story

11h Completionist

5-8h Spent by most gamers

*Based on 23 analyzed playthroughs

Skip Videos

Videos

Skip Games Like F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin

67%5.4kreviews

F.E.A.R. 3

2011

Shooter

84%3.2kreviews

Crysis 2

2011

Shooter

92%12.6kreviews

Dead Space 2

2011

Survival Shooter

+10

79%2.8kreviews

Crysis 3

2020

Shooter

82%10.7kreviews

The Evil Within 2

2017

Survival Role Playing Shooter

+11

More games like F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin

Skip FAQs

Frequently Asked Questions

F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin is a shooter game with horror theme.

F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin is available on PC, Windows, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 and others.

The main story can be completed in around 7 hours, while the entire game is estimated to take about 11 hours to finish. On average players spend around 36 hours playing F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin.

F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin was released on February 12, 2009.

F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin was developed by Monolith.

F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin has received mostly positive reviews from players and mostly positive reviews from critics. Most players liked this game for its story but disliked it for its stability.

F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin is a single player game with multiplayer support.

Similar games include F.E.A.R. 3, Crysis 2, Dead Space 2, Crysis 3, The Evil Within 2 and others.

F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin

Platforms