Try here:
http://www.doomworld.com/idgames/index.php?id=15332

All the wikis point to the 667 link. It must have just f-ing died, but it's pretty fitting actually. ZDoom is so dynamic, you have to get the latest version week to week just to play anything. 

I just got into reading the site and didn't download the mod, don't know if I'll have time, tbh.

I'll try and get round to it. 

a nicely working System Shock abandonware pack for modern Windows: http://www.strangebedfellows.de/index.php/topic,211.0.html
Finally I can play it :)

and http://www.gametap.com/grimm/episode_03.html 

I did play through the whole thing. Combat was fun, but generally the levels were average, and the final spider boss shitty, imho, (i gave in and cheated). There's also three amusing concept levels (e1m0, e2m0, e3m0) i didn't finish. 

been a while since I've liked a game with crap maps but the intense gameplay in this has definitely got me looking past the very poor level design.

The graphics engine itself is ok though (but as usual with monolith engines it runs like shit compared to other comparable engines), the attempt at 'horror' laughable, the enemies not very varied, but boy is it fun!

I thought it would get repetitive sooner or later but it didnt, pretty much every fight is heart pounding thanks to a combination of good weapons, good AI and plentiful ammo and health. 

Excellent monsters and inventive gamplay, cool weapons. Good to see a game focused so much on gameplay! Also the ending - weird 70's horror movie ending, I liked. 

F.E.A.R excellent
F.E.A.R Extraction Point excellent too

F.E.A.R Mission Perseus sucks, really sucks

horror scenes: not really
story absolutely the same
graphics, worse than original, textures that are not even bump-mapped, washed out, very high minimum light level, too high default gamma,
unfair KI, too hard gameplay 

http://steamgames.com/tf2/heavy/sandvich.htm

I lol'ed 

Interesting you picked up the same 70's horror vibe I did from F.E.A.R as it was actually one of the things I really liked about it. I thought the first few minutes of gameplay had it in spades as well.

It's funny because although the lead designer claims to have been influenced by J-horror like the ring, I think that he was subconsciously chanelling a lot of late 60s / early 70s horror stuff for the backstory and overall mood of the game. 

is definitely noticeable, and for me in a very distracting and offputting kind of way because it is done a bit cheesily.

The very first level did it ok but the rest of the time it looked like a cheap gimmick. 

http://www.gametap.com/grimm/episode_04.html 

Even if you don't like WoW, Blizzard's cinematics are always worth watching :)

http://www.wow-europe.com/wrath/intro.xml 

So why did they channel their own office and the empty lot behind their own office for the level design and overall look of the game? 

It was the best fit for the story, gameplay, and engine. I can't see anything more fantastical working very well. I certainly don't think there's anything wrong with doing a somewhat realistic setting in a game if it's done well and in F.E.A.R's case I think it was.

Also there was a lot more breakup in the game than people give it credit for. In addition to the much complained about office building crawl, there was a pretty nice tech section, some run down tenements, some good industrial stuff, and even a nice dock area.

I'd say it's pretty tough to make a game that has a wealth of interesting places without relying on some hokey Daikatana bullshit like you're a time traveller or something. 

the level design was atrocious, theres no two ways about it. It was hands down some of the worst I've seen.

It's one thing to have a realistic setting, another to have used what felt like te diablo2 level generator to randomly spice together pre fabricated rooms and corridors.

But the game itself is good. 

But the game itself is good

How can you say that the game was good but the level design was the worst you've ever seen? Isn't level design ideally the place where the game's bits and pieces come together as a cohesive whole? If you thought the A.I. for example, was good, wouldn't that mean that the level design facilitated it? If you thought the horror stuff was good, wouldn't the sequences have been scripted and paced by the designers?

The "bad level design" knock against F.E.A.R has always bothered me because the game reviewed really well across the board, sold very well, and people generally seem to really like it, so I don't understand where the criticism fits into that.

It's got a lot of right angles and generic industrial stuff going on, but I would say none of it is "bad" in the sense that the game overall was not boring and is generally considered to be quite immersive. Don't confuse realistic design (offices and warehouses *are* boring places by design) with bad design. 

How can you say that the game was good but the level design was the worst you've ever seen?

I haven't played FEAR but that sentence reminded me of Painkiller, which was fun despite having lackluster level design.

It's just unfortunate because (in the case of Painkiller at least) it could have been a great game with better level design, rather than merely "good". 

what he meant was the visual side of things, its just room corridor room and they all look the same.

As a gameplay space, each area is actually setup very well, and usually there are multiple entry points and routes for the AI to take which makes each fight different.

I actually really enjoyed fear, I never quite understood why it gets such a bad rap. 

sorry I should have clarified that, I was speaking plainly from a visual sense. Hence my comment about the d2 like level generator. But I do not agree that just because the level design was meant to be realistic that it had to be that repetitive and boring. Splinter Cell games have better looking maps and they are all about realism.

What made the game fun was the intensity of the combats, the usefulness of the weapons and the AI. And as daz said most the fights were setup well for utilising the AI. 

I only played the demo though but there certainly is a difference between realistic and boring/weak. 

the layout of FEAR's levels was 100% designed to work with the AI. The distribution of cover points, multiple entry and exit routes, corridor loops, size and shape of the spaces etc. etc. was purely made to create the combat experience that the gameplay designers intended.

The art direction is another thing, and yes it was fucking boring as hell. I wish people would stop confusing the two things. 

sucks. 

i'd say painkiller and fear are total opposites.

fear had shit visual design but good gameplay. painkiller and incredible visuals and boring gameplay. :P 

get those Painkiller maps to load into Fear, woo-hoo, win win.

I did love playing Fear exponentially more than I enjoyed Painkiller. Fear could get your heart beating with simple AI flank maneuvers, and those plain looking areas, in particular, I recall a basement near the start, could be creepy as hell. 

I noticed just then that in more than one place simnultaneously but also by pure coincidence two or more threads were "bigging up" AVP1.

Well I loved AVP1. The monster AI is pretty much the best I've seen, and not bad gameplay to boot.
Level design? (I liked it)

Shame AVP2 was so wank.