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

In just a few short weeks, console and PC gamers alike will enjoy Monolith's F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin in all its nail-biting, pants-wetting glory. This sequel offers much of the same supernatural flavor, intense action and unsettling content of the original game. But players of the first F.E.A.R. will notice that the team is approaching level design a bit differently this time around. To find out more about the lessons they learned from the previous game and how those are impacting the design of the sequel, we interviewed some of the key members of the development team including lead engineer Russ Pecoraro, principal game designer Craig Hubbard and lead designers Brian Frank and Leo De Bruyn.

IGN PC: The original game was developed first as a PC game and then ported over the years to various consoles. F.E.A.R. 2 is being developed for the PC, PS3, and Xbox 360 in mind. How did this affect design and development?

Russ Pecoraro: Monolith developed the original F.E.A.R. game for the PC market. The publisher tapped other companies to work on the console ports after the PC version was finished. For F.E.A.R. 2, Monolith developed all three versions of the game internally and simultaneously. This forced us to consider intricacies of each platform when designing and developing systems and allowed us to take advantage of the strengths of each platform where we could. Overall, this is a very positive thing and keeps the primary experience consistent across all three platforms. The downside to this approach is occasionally compromises need to be made to best accommodate the least common denominator. This isn't ideal, but when required to make these compromises we made decisions that wouldn't negatively affect the F.E.A.R. 2 experience on the other platforms.

IGN PC: What sort of things does the increase in computing power since the original F.E.A.R. allow you to do that are new? Are there bigger levels? Is there more environmental interaction?

Russ Pecoraro: We took advantage of the bump in computing power as well as our own internal optimizations wherever we could. Our environments are larger and more densely populated with physically simulated objects and there are more AI in combat scenarios over what we were able to do for the original F.E.A.R. game. For F.E.A.R. 2 we also added features such as motion blur, HDR and ambient occlusion. I think all of this adds to a much more robust experience.

IGN PC: So how did you go about making new environments? What sort of research did you do? What sorts of places did you want to create?

Brian Frank: The environments provide a spatial framework for the intense combat in F.E.A.R. 2. The design team focused on ideas for environments that would provide the greatest opportunity for dynamic and exciting combat. In some cases the setting allowed designers to highlight specific AI behaviors. For example, the hospital missions consist of networks of interconnected rooms and hallways that the enemy AI use in flanking tactics. The city location on the other hand, showcases destruction of the environment. Blowing up cars, walls and debris that AI are using as cover is a satisfying tactic for the player, and amplifies the cinematic presentation of combat.

Environments in F.E.A.R. 2 are also used to create an atmosphere of tension and horror. From a narrative perspective we wanted each setting to have some form of dramatic reveal and chose locations that best suited this purpose. The significance of each setting is initially shrouded in mystery. Progression through an environment is designed to unravel that mystery and lead to horrific revelations.

IGN PC: The original F.E.A.R. was panned for its repetitive environments. How did that happen? Was it just a matter of not having enough time to create more environments? Did you originally plan to have more environments at all?

Leo De Bruyn: There were a number of factors that contributed to the environments we ended up with in the game, including time and budget constraints. Each new environment takes a lot of work from a team of artists to create. By sharing as many assets as we could across environments, we were able to make more levels, and thus a game of greater length.

Another issue had to do with the direction that we took the art and lighting. We wanted to make the game have a very creepy and oppressive vibe. The color palettes reflected this, and I think we created this feeling very successfully. In retrospect, perhaps a little too successfully. A little break here and there would have helped reduce some of the visual fatigue, while increasing the impact of the overall effect.

Finally, the way that we constructed the environments was very modular. Each fight or exploration area was kind of its own little mini-level. This let us easily tweak the pacing of the game and add and remove areas on the fly, but the downside was that the spaces tended to lack a realistic flow or sense of being a real place with a layout that you could anticipate. Players just kind of followed the space to see where it led.

We did have some other environments (including a pretty wild car chase scene through a series of drainage ditches, while being attacked by choppers) but because of time and resources, focused on making what we had look and play as best it could.

This time around for F.E.A.R. 2, we've been able to take these key learnings and create environments that are more diverse.