F.E.A.R. 3

F.E.A.R. 3 is an exciting horror shooter with atmosphere as thick as the blood that splatters the walls of nearly every level. Not the scariest game on the market, but good co-op and multiplayer sets this game apart from its contemporaries.

Starting at $2.93Buy now

Get on Steam

Get on Xbox Games Store

In F.E.A.R. 3, play as Point Man or Paxton Fettel in a terrifyingly gruesome adventure, where you'll face your twisted mother, Alma, in co-op mode several years after the events of F.E.A.R. 2. Experiance Divergent Co-op, where your abilities impact both your gameplay and your partner's, while engaging in frenetic combat with 360-degree cover and evolving slow-mo modes. Prepare for a deep, socially engaging experience filled with fear and paranormal events.

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Reviews

62%

Audience ScoreBased on 2,699 reviews

story229 positive mentions

grinding12 negative mentions

Fun co-op gameplay that enhances the experience.
Satisfying gunplay and mechanics, with enjoyable combat.
Interesting character dynamics between Point Man and Fettel.

Lacks the horror elements that defined the previous games.
Short campaign length, completed in around 4-6 hours.
Convoluted story that fails to deliver a satisfying conclusion.

story
1,128 mentions
20 % positive mentions
65 % neutral mentions
14 % negative mentions
The story of "F.E.A.R. 3" has received largely negative feedback, with many players describing it as convoluted, forgettable, and poorly executed compared to its predecessors. Critics note that the narrative lacks coherence, often feels disjointed, and fails to deliver the atmospheric horror that characterized earlier entries in the series. While some appreciate the attempt to wrap up the overarching plot involving the characters Alma, Point Man, and Fettel, the execution leaves much to be desired, leading many to recommend the game primarily for its gameplay rather than its story.
- “The story is amazing.”
- “The campaign, playable solo or with a friend, offers intense firefights and heart-pounding moments as you unravel the twisted story.”
- “The story is well-written and engaging, with plenty of twists and turns to keep you on the edge of your seat.”
- “The story is completely ridiculous, with the player assuming the role of the point man, same guy in the first, and must make his way to alma who is having a baby.”
- “The story is a little ridiculous at this point and if you are considering by a game for plot then you probably want to look elsewhere.”
- “The story is bland and uninspired.”
gameplay
590 mentions
27 % positive mentions
62 % neutral mentions
11 % negative mentions
The gameplay in *F.E.A.R. 3* has received mixed reviews, with many players noting a shift from the tactical, horror-driven mechanics of its predecessors to a more generic, cover-based shooter style reminiscent of *Call of Duty*. While the introduction of cooperative gameplay and unique character abilities, such as Paxton Fettel's possession mechanics, adds some novelty, the overall experience is often described as repetitive and lacking the atmospheric tension that defined earlier entries in the series. The game features solid gunplay and a satisfying slow-motion mechanic, but many feel it sacrifices depth and horror for a more mainstream, action-oriented approach.
- “Last two games are known for the tactical gameplay, where players actively use the environment as cover, move and position strategically, with the help of slow motion to dodge bullets and assist aiming.”
- “Though the plot is forgettable, it’s the gameplay that stands tall here.”
- “The gameplay is extremely entertaining in my opinion.”
- “More importantly, the tactical movement and positioning are replaced with simply holding your ground and shooting waves of enemies coming at you – it no longer has the unique gameplay of the series, but feels more like playing Call of Duty.”
- “The gameplay is messy and confusing, the level design unnatural, the story nonexistent, the weapons are poor, and some sections of the game are so horribly repetitive, with the worst possible checkpoints.”
- “The gameplay is literally that of every Call of Duty since Modern Warfare, but spooky... unless you make it to playthrough 2 and then it's like Geist.”
graphics
289 mentions
37 % positive mentions
54 % neutral mentions
10 % negative mentions
The graphics of the game have received mixed reviews, with some praising the visuals as decent or even impressive for their time, while others criticize them as outdated or inferior to previous entries in the series. Many players noted that while the graphics can create an immersive atmosphere, they often lack the detail and polish expected from modern titles, leading to a perception of the game as visually subpar compared to its predecessors. Overall, the graphics are seen as a step up from earlier games but still fall short of contemporary standards, with some elements appearing muddy or poorly optimized.
- “The graphics bring this haunted world to life, or should I say, to an eerie, otherworldly existence.”
- “The game features great graphics and sound design, creating an immersive experience that will leave you jumping at every shadow.”
- “The graphics are the best in the series and still hold their ground in today's standards.”
- “Starting with the obvious, the graphics look like dogshit and the lighting lacks the contrast of the first game.”
- “The overall art style and graphics are unappealing and look incredibly bad for a 2011 game.”
- “Graphically, the game is laughable, looking like an Xbox 360/PS3 launch title at best.”
atmosphere
207 mentions
35 % positive mentions
52 % neutral mentions
13 % negative mentions
The atmosphere in "F.E.A.R. 3" has been widely criticized for lacking the immersive horror elements that defined its predecessors, with many reviewers noting a shift towards a more action-oriented, arcade shooter experience. While some players appreciated the game's graphical improvements and occasional creepy moments, the overall consensus is that the game fails to deliver the tense, oppressive atmosphere and psychological horror that fans expected, often feeling generic and devoid of suspense. The introduction of cooperative gameplay and constant achievement notifications further detracted from the atmosphere, leaving many longtime fans disappointed.
- “The atmosphere is rich, industrial music peppers the air, explosions and blood clouds dance in your slowed down vision.”
- “The game isn't as scary (not at all really) but has really good sound design, and a great atmosphere with some really cool/creepy environments.”
- “The story is engaging and the game overall is very atmospheric, with fantastic sound design and some nice set pieces.”
- “The atmosphere from the original games is gone, and it's hardly even a horror game.”
- “It removes all the atmosphere and horror and replaces it with a cooperative, arcadey experience that feels more like Call of Duty with jump scares.”
- “There's no atmosphere, the game isn't scary at all, and it's not even that good as an action game either; all the shooting sections feel the same.”
replayability
49 mentions
24 % positive mentions
67 % neutral mentions
8 % negative mentions
The game's replayability is a mixed bag, with some players appreciating the divergent co-op mechanics and the option to play as different characters, which adds variety and encourages multiple playthroughs. However, many reviewers note that the linear design, simplistic storytelling, and short campaign length significantly limit replay value, leading to a generally short-lived experience. Overall, while there are elements that enhance replayability, such as character choices and cooperative play, many players feel it falls short of offering substantial incentive to replay.
- “The addition of divergent co-op mechanics adds replay value, encouraging multiple playthroughs to experience both sides of the narrative.”
- “Two playable characters give the levels some replayability (you can play as either Paxton Fettel or Point Man).”
- “The campaign isn't very long, but has replay value as there are two characters to choose from with two different endings.”
- “The lack of meaningful choices or branching paths, coupled with linear level design, diminishes the game's replay value, resulting in a relatively short-lived experience for some players.”
- “Bear in mind, there's nearly 0 replayability in this game; you will most likely play the game once or twice.”
- “These additions feel like an attempt to milk replayability more than anything else, and don't add much, if anything.”
music
42 mentions
19 % positive mentions
64 % neutral mentions
17 % negative mentions
The music in the game receives mixed reviews, with some praising its ability to enhance atmosphere and evoke adrenaline, while others find it forgettable and lacking in memorable moments. Notably, the inclusion of Danzig's "Mother" in the credits is highlighted as a positive aspect. Overall, the soundtrack is described as average, failing to capture the horror essence of its predecessors, and often leaning more towards action than fear.
- “Sound design and music is amazing, really keeps you on edge as you move through dimly-lit corridors.”
- “The atmosphere is rich, industrial music peppers the air, explosions and blood clouds dance in your slowed down vision.”
- “Sometimes the music in this game gives me an adrenaline rush and that alone is enough to make me go berserk and rain hell on my enemies; I even forget this is a horror game, I feel like I am the horror.”
- “The atmosphere is far too bright, the music leans almost entirely in the 'action' direction rather than the 'fear' direction, it has too few truly memorable moments and borrows too many elements from F.E.A.R.”
- “The music and sound are terrible.”
- “They totally removed the great sound design and cues from the first two games and replaced it with a run-of-the-mill, looping soundtrack that doesn't match in-game dynamics closely enough.”
optimization
33 mentions
30 % positive mentions
61 % neutral mentions
9 % negative mentions
Overall, the optimization of the game receives mixed reviews. While some players report smooth performance and good graphics, others experience significant frame drops and performance issues, particularly in certain areas and with older DirectX versions. The game is noted for its decent performance on modern hardware, but inconsistencies and optimization challenges remain a concern for many users.
- “Well optimized, very polished; the story is kind of all over the place, but serviceable.”
- “The game runs smoothly and does not have any audio issues unlike the second game.”
- “There is plenty of detail and the performance is smooth.”
- “It looks graphically inferior to the prequels, performance is inferior to the previous games somehow, and they retroactively made the story from every single previous DLC and expansion pack non-canon.”
- “This title has nothing to appeal to an action shooter perspective or a horror perspective and the performance tanks in areas that have no right to cause frame drops.”
- “Very poorly optimized and repetitive.”
humor
30 mentions
100 % positive mentions
0 % neutral mentions
0 % negative mentions
The humor in the game is a mixed bag, with many players finding it unintentionally funny due to awkward dialogue, silly enemy interactions, and broken gameplay mechanics. While some appreciate the comedic moments, especially when playing with friends, others feel that the humor detracts from the intended horror atmosphere, making the game more of a lighthearted experience than a genuine scare. Overall, the humor is often described as a redeeming quality amidst the game's shortcomings, providing laughs in an otherwise lackluster experience.
- “My favorite oft-repeated enemy phase is, 'Did you see that?' The humor makes the same enemy yells during combat tolerable given how often they repeat throughout the levels.”
- “As Kiba Snowpaw, I give this game a howling thumbs up for anyone who loves a good scare mixed with a dash of humor.”
- “I found myself joking and laughing at the comical and predictable nature of the game (e.g. -- oh, wouldn't it be grand if x happened now? ... oh, I guess it is).”
emotional
14 mentions
57 % positive mentions
0 % neutral mentions
43 % negative mentions
The emotional aspect of the game has been largely criticized, with many players expressing disappointment over a boring and cliché story that fails to evoke any genuine feelings. Reviewers noted that the characters felt flat and unengaging, leading to a lack of emotional investment in the narrative. Overall, the game's inability to deliver a compelling emotional experience has left players feeling frustrated and disheartened, particularly in comparison to earlier entries in the series.
- “It's just so heartbreaking to see what this series has become.”
- “I don't believe we need to be privy to every aspect of a character, however they made them seem like cardboard cutouts, instead of real humans, ghosts, or aliens; there was no difference for they all acted flat and emotionally frigid.”
- “I'll stick to fanfiction to get an emotional high.”
- “Boring story, a lot of clichés, etc. finished just to close the Fear topic for me.”
- “Whether it's the extremely short length or the boring story, there are definitely things to dislike.”
- “I just got done playing this game and I have to say that this game is not as good as the other Fear games. It feels more like a Call of Duty ripoff than a Fear game. Boring story, easy as hell even on high difficulty, not scary, and it is the final nail in the coffin for the Fear franchise... that really makes me sad :(”
grinding
13 mentions
8 % positive mentions
0 % neutral mentions
92 % negative mentions
Players consistently describe the grinding aspect of the game as tedious and unengaging, with repetitive combat mechanics that lead to frustration rather than satisfaction. Many reviews highlight the lack of rewarding gameplay, with chaotic enemy waves and convoluted level designs contributing to a sense of monotony. Overall, the grinding experience is seen as a major drawback, detracting from the enjoyment of the game.
- “You'll need a second life for grinding.”
- “Additionally, some levels feature counterintuitive pathing which may turn the heat of the fight into a tedious search for the correct path to the next area.”
- “Playing as Point Man is just boring and tedious, as you most likely will stay behind cover most of the time, popping out to shoot enemies and waiting for health to regenerate, and repeat.”
- “There are a few fun levels, but overall there are too many tedious portions and sections where they just throw lots of enemies at you all at once and it becomes too chaotic.”
monetization
11 mentions
0 % positive mentions
0 % neutral mentions
100 % negative mentions
The monetization aspect of the game is widely criticized as a blatant cash grab, with many reviewers feeling it lacks the development and focus of its predecessors. Players suggest that the game is designed primarily to exploit its niche fanbase, with heavy reliance on ads and a gameplay experience that feels less polished. Overall, the consensus is to skip this installment in favor of the original titles, which are regarded as far superior.
- “Do yourself a favor and play (or replay as the case may be) the first two games, as they continue to hold up - much better than this cynical cash grab.”
- “It's clear that the original developers, Monolith, had no hand in this and this game was purely a cash grab to milk fans of the franchise.”
- “Feels like an obvious cash grab aimed at a niche fanbase, which doesn't really make much sense, but whatever.”
stability
11 mentions
18 % positive mentions
0 % neutral mentions
82 % negative mentions
Overall, the game's stability is mixed; while some players report a smooth experience with minimal bugs and good performance, others have encountered significant glitches and server issues. The transition to host-based co-op improved stability for some, but persistent bugs and occasional FPS drops during intense moments detract from the experience. Despite these issues, many players appreciate that the game does not suffer from frequent crashes.
- “The game runs great honestly, while lacking in color.”
- “The graphics are nice and it runs smoothly on a 144Hz monitor.”
- “With that said, the game is extremely buggy at times and has the ability to sometimes kick you from servers, which subsequently got fixed once single-player co-op got moved to the host's IP instead of the game's servers.”
- “Might have been a good game way back when, but now it is a buggy mess.”
- “Cons: not much different from Fear 2 (especially the visuals), some FPS drops during set pieces, lacking effective 'horror', AI can get buggy, the last interval could have been a lot less annoying.”
character development
5 mentions
20 % positive mentions
20 % neutral mentions
60 % negative mentions
Character development in the game is largely criticized for being minimal and predictable, with many players feeling that the characters lack depth and believability. The design choices, particularly for key characters, have also been noted as inconsistent and confusing, detracting from the overall narrative experience.
- “The character design of Fettel in this game was so different from the previous ones that I didn't realize he was that cannibal from the first game!”
- “Character development is minimal, and the plot progression may feel predictable or formulaic to players familiar with the horror genre.”
- “When one of the most lovable characters in the franchise dies, I just wanted to skip the (unskippable) cutscene; a straight line has more dimensions than the character development.”
- “No character development or proper believable narration to speak of.”