Which was better and why?
My vote is for Q2. I dig the strogg over mish-mash of cuthulu and clive baker like freaks, weapons were great (first appearance of RailGun!), colour pallete in game was wider (Q1 had its pallete shifted towards brown, gray and black, 'cuz of technical limitations at the time), level design was much more vertical and varied, with bigger levels, there was some degree of back-tracking (with fresh enemy spawns, of course), soundtracks for both games were superb, but Q2 takes the cake for me. Also, Q2 engine was basis for first HL engine, so it had more untapped potential in it (you can se it used fully in some mods).
>still the smoothest game engine ever made
Not with that framerate cap, bruv'nor.
I also vote for Quake 1, more for the atmosphere and level design than anything. Though Q2 trumps it in weapon balance and overall presentation (coloured lighting!)
I only played single player, so Q2.
Q1 had far too repetitive sceneries, and the music wasn't particularly action oriented. I think Doom on PS1 did the job of making a cheesy FPS creepy with the choice of music better.
I'd say this wise anon >>2714381 is right.
Also, using the blaster (or hyper blaster!) in long dark corridors was my first "TECHNOLOGY" moment, because the computer I was using had the brand new 3DFX Voodoo2.
Shit was awesome...
Quake 2 had better levels, a more coherent art direction better soundtrack. The only thing that I like more about Quake 1 is the linear level design. Quake 2 had some cool levels but I just hated backtracking to find some stupid switch so that I could finally procede. Also I like the fact that Quake 2 atleast had SOME kind of story, obviously I didn't expect it to be very deep, nor did I want it to be but in Quake 1 you just get dropped in this mish-mash of borrowed horror elements without a clue of what's going on and that kindof ruined the atmosphere.
>all these idiotic doom babies claiming 2 is the better game
This board actually gets worse every day. It's pathetic to see.
>implying that means fuck all
These are the faggots that went onto make Doom 3 and a bunch of other irrelevant shit which never hit anywhere near the heights of their previous games. Id Software died after Quake 3. Meanwhile Romero went onto make Daikatana after Quake, top kek.
You cannot compare Quake's gameplay to the second game's. The flow is better, the weapons feels better and the enemy types are more interesting. Quake 2 on the other hand is slower, the movement is sludgier and most of the gameplay devolves to peekaboo pop and shot crap with hitscanners, especially on nightmare where the enemies don't flinch. The gameplay dynamics of the different combinations of its enemy types aren't nearly as interesting as Quake's. While Quake 2 may look prettier and more impressive graphically, and may even have a better sense of progression since its level design was based on a more 'realistic' backdrop in contrast to Quake's abstract maps, the actual combat situations created were nowhere near as interesting as anything Quake had.
You kids don't understand this because you were raised on Halo and have shitty opinions about pretty much everything. Sadly over time this board is only gonna get worse and worse. You people need to fuck off back to your roots on XBL and stop pretending you know anything about video games. Fucking plebs, my god.
>thinks Q2 engine was the basis of Half Life engine when in fact it was derived from Q1
I checked my sources. Apparently both Q1 and Q2 are called id Tech 2. Also Q2 engine is still based on Q1 engine with all that fancy lighting, sudo-physics, trigger carryover from map to map and ability to store a state of a level to be loaded upon re-entry. All the features that were worked into GoldSrc, making it a quasi-Q2 engine frankensteined from original Q1 engine and pieces of Q2 code. So please forgive my confusion.
But... that does not change the fact that newer Q2 engine is simply superior to older Q1 version. And thus, my vote still goes to Q2.
Quake 1 for sure.
Not only for better atmosphere and monsters but the action is fast and explosive. Quake 2 felt slow and plodding in comparison. Q1 also has far more interesting level design.
>But... that does not change the fact that newer Q2 engine is simply superior to older Q1 version. And thus, my vote still goes to Q2.
By your reasoning COD MW2 is superior to all previous Quake games because it uses a more advanced Quake engine. GG.
Or you could be less of a spergy faglord about it.
So what if some of us like 2 better?
That makes no implications on age, that's preference.
The only reason this board is shit is because faggots like you "plebs! everyone who doesn't agree with me is a pleb and underage!" shitpost all over the place.
Go to fuckin' /r9k/ and sperg out over there.
Me reasoning is limited in scope to deciding between Q1 and Q2. Your hyperbole of my argument is flawed. Like if we were having that ethernal discussion ak47 vs m16, and I would have said that lover production cost is a big plus for ak, and someone would accuse me preferring throwing rocks to shooting, since that is the cheapest.
Also, let me rephrase my engine argument for you:
Q2 allows bigger levels, higher enemy and object limits on each map, interconnectivity of said maps (with multiple entry, re-entry and exit points) and more complex enemy A.I. That alone makes it technically superior, with less limitations for creating more interesting and dynamic game.
Quake 1 is a classic and it would be the greatest game ever made if it had a little more enemy variety. The level design and use of vertical spaces are unmatched to this day.
Quake 2 is a piece of shit that killed classic FPS design.
>Quake 1 is a classic and it would be the greatest game ever made if it had a little more enemy variety. The level design and use of vertical spaces are unmatched to this day.
This guy gets it.
I would prefer Quake because of gameplay, style and history. The only venue where Quake II reigns is in multiplayer coupled with "The Edge". Other than that part two feels no longer like a pristine id title because of the stupid space/robot theme.
>Quake 1 is a classic and it would be the greatest game ever made if it had a little more enemy variety. The level design and use of vertical spaces are unmatched to this day.
2 had objectively more usage of vertical space.
>playing quake I and III while growing up
>love the fuck out of both equal parts and adore both for their own merits
>only now figure out I never realized how come I always played the first and third game, but for some reason never wondered if there was anything in between
>one day playing quake III, dad walks into the room with a black disc
>"holy shit what" -me
>asks me to put aside, places it into the disc tray
>setup screen comes up
>OH SHIT OH SHIT OH SHITTTTTTT
>tl;dr cinematic intro, first level comes up
>explosions and some guy talking into your radio
>dad still playing, breaks down the crackled window before him, shoots the first guys, finds the shotgun, wrecks shit
>I think my jaw had literally fucking dropped to the floor by then
>MUH FUCKING 12 YR OLD DICK
I recall my brother and I going literally Nintendo 64 kid levels of apeshit. Hands down one of the best videogame experiences I ever had bar none. Fucking glorious.
on a very related note, I think it can be universally agreed that Quake I RL and GL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Quake II's piece of shit RL and GL
>all these quake 2 idiots
What the fuck happened to this board? What a plebeian shithole /vr/ has become.
Must be the influx of /v/ via the Doom babies. The same Doom babies that don't understand why Plutonia is easily the best out of the original iwads. /vr/ for the most part has the same credibility as 2015 /v/ does when it comes to retro shooters.
>I don't play Multiplayer in general, personally because of how much I have to git gud
Yeah exactly. Faggots itt are pissants that suck at video games and that's why they think Q2 is the better game. From a gameplay standpoint Q2 is fucking vomit compared to the first one.
If they think it's a better game then it's just like...their opinion man. If you think it's such a worse game then maybe back up your reasoning so you won't seem like a troll? Or at least try not to come off as aggressive.
>Using the term literally in that statement
Like hell you do. No educated (Or at the very least intelligent) man uses the term literally in a statement like that, because it serves no purpose. Enjoy making a slave wage and lying on the internet to bolster your confidence, I'm sure its working wonders for you.
I think OG Quake has the more active, more talented custom map scene going on right now, but neither game's aged that poorly just based on launch content. Still need to play II, which should be easier now that I know half a thing about the game's source ports, but I have too many Quake PAKs to complete, and that's driving me nuts.
Literally edgelord fedora shit. Anyone with taste plays Descent instead.
Don't mind me, I'm just going to ruin multiplayer shooters forever.
>Britbong calling someone else retarded
>maymay spewing newfag britbong
>Not being aborted from his mom's basement at 22
I asked for that McDouble like 20 minutes ago, don't make me get the manager, chav.
Skip the PAKs for now, get through Q2 first. Its not a hard game, shouldn't take you long at all. As others in the thread have said, its a fairly different game from the first, but good on its own merits, and on release had some nifty TECHNOLOGY moments with the right hardware.
You serious anon-kun?
Q2 multi maps with no health, armor or powershield puckups, but filled to the brim with railguns were the ultimate kathartic turbo twitch shooting trance-like experiences. Miss your shot and die, aim to long and die, move to slow and die, show you back or side to the wrong direction and die. It is like a beautiful, bloody zen mantra.
Quake 2 is garbage. Irritating level design, everything's either orange and brown or bathed in colored lighting, boring enemies and way less fun weapons than the first game... I can't think of a single reason I'd want to play it.
why is it that everytime I hear someone complain about the guns in Q2 Im immediately reminded of Quake's axe
the only two weapons in quake I that felt even remotely satisfying to use were the GL and RL, and perhaps the super nailgun to an extent
everything else felt like shit, sorry m79
also you sound like you got lost in the levels a lot, are you sure you're not that same fag a few posts ago complaining about quake not having an automap
>What was your reaction when Half-Life 1 came out?
I didn't get to experience half-life to its full extent until many years later sadly, but I can assure you that for both me and my brother it was Quake II all over again.
although if there's one thing I will always lash myself out for not doing back when it was due, then that would be not playing Unreal when it came out.
I've played so many games throughout my life, particularly FPS games and had had so many shit relentlessly thrown at me over the years, equal parts both good as well as fucking terrible, to the point where playing it just a few years ago didn't even fucking -phase- me.
I mean, I could easily tell it was most probably one of the best games ever made from the fucking get-go, but I just couldn't bring myself to enjoy it the way I should have.
When I lived in a trailer, all I played was Doom, because that's all the computer I could afford.
But now I don't play these games anymore, I only like the old stuff from the 90's anyway. I mean the game engines, maps and mods.
Having tried to play Q2 a few times and then having finished Q1, gonna have to go with Q1. Yes my personal preference has to do with the superior aesthetic of Q1, but also Q1 plays better, where Q2 is slow and does shit like start the player off with projectile weapons and enemies have hitscan weapons.
Q2 multiplayer is godlike though.
Maybe I'm playing wrong, but Quake 2 had so much downtime. I'm always fighting something in 1, even when I pick up a key a wall will open with some monsters and a shortcut.
In 2 there are moments where I cleared out the room and I'm just searching for a key or walking down an empty hallway. People rag on Doom and Duke as being backtracking looking for an obscure key, Quake 2 was worse than those games will ever be.
Guess it was too much to expect the multiple posts I've reported over the course of the day to go noticed.
Like, jesus, I get it, it's a volunteer position, but anyone with half a brain could see all this stupid tbh fam shitposting and fling that crap out but instead I have to add that shit to my filter just to even READ this fucking board anymore.
>id admits that quake 1 & 3 were tech demos
Oh wow. This is exactly how the games felt for me. Not saying they aren't great, but they also feel pretty minimal, or putting it less favorable; bare-bones,
I'm not interested in Disneyland rides when I play these games. I guess that's what people want these days though, so I don't play them anymore. I think it's great that you have to backtrack and explore sometimes. I don't like every map or game to use same formula. That's why I don't play modern games, and that's why I also don't play modern Doom maps and such. I'm not interested in a formula of game design that some kind of ephemeral consensus decided was the "right" way to make levels. So that's why I only ever play the 90's stuff, because those were made during the infancy of the genre, before people started having too many strong opinions about things. All that does is limit things and eventually result in something like modern FPS design.
Anyway, not my problem, as I said, I gave up on anything made after 90's. You can sort that stuff on your own now.
>all these favorable quake 2 posts
Not shitting on you all, but it's very telling of /vr/ as a single-player focused board.
I was involved in the Quake 1/Quakeworld competitive scene, wayyyy back in '03 so for me Quake 1 is pretty much a game i have so memorized and know all the ins and outs to, Quake 2 just seems like such a petty little thing in comparison.
Y'all should watch some old Quakeworld tournaments, even the slightest difference in skill becomes incredibly pronounced in the scoreboards by the end. It's a beautiful thing to watch.
i cut my teeth on Q2 with my first computer, a pentium 2 233mhz with a voodoo card. that shit blew me the fuck away.
sad i never got to experience Q1 at the time and had to play it almost 10 years later, but i'd say it definitely had the stronger single player.
but, man, online was where it was at in the Q2 days. gamespy was just getting started and wasn't shit. there were mods everywhere. it was impossible to play on 56k... well i guess that wasn't a plus but whatever, we didn't know any better back then. dsl wasn't available for a couple years where i lived so i put up with it.
it's all rose-colored glasses i know///
>it was impossible to play on 56k.
Oh, bollocks. Everyone else was using 56k as well, except for those 33k suckers, so it was fair play. I could never get the hang of high ping predicting with Quake 2's slow sausage launcher but leading with the railgun was like second nature.
It's not necessarily bad, though. Combat in 2 is completely different from 1. Whereas 1 is essentially non stop slaughterfest, in 2 you need to learn your environment, your enemies and your weapons, since by mid-game 1-2 successful hits could finish you off. It makes the game more strategic and interesting imo.
yes but back then mp fps only tracked frags not deaths so k/d was not a thing. people just played to have fun and get a ton of kills so matches were more hectic.
k/d killed the fps imo
They were both good in their own way. Quake 1 was more gothic and had trent reznor soundtrack. Quake 2 was ironically more industrial with cyborgs in space. Quake 1 seemed to be universally loved. I want to say Quake 2 wasn't as popular, but it had some of the greatest multilayer ever. Nothing could touch it until UT99 started building up steam.
It's not much fun for long periods of time, but only happened on crowded Q1 DM servers, if everyone is same skill. If you're better than average, you can last a lot longer though.
I eventually played lots of 3Wave CTF stuff, and there it wasn't so chaotic.
I also liked to play on plain DM servers (or using simple mods like the rune stuff, or grappling hook) with just a handful of people. I had a 28.8K modem, and often got 250-300 ping on reasonably close servers. Sometimes I could frag people on ISDN connections. Dudes on T1 were of course impossible to touch, except by playing very cunningly (no straight up fighting).
I dropped out of online scene after Q2 came out. Didn't like the slower pace of that game. Had fun in single player mode though Anyway with my machine (AMD K6/400 with just a plain 2D 1MB video card) I was limited to lowest possible screen resolution.
Ooops, I meant Pentium 120. That's what I had when Q2 came out. Didn't upgrade for a couple years, and by then didn't really play much FPS anymore, except older ones like Doom.
With the p120, Q1 had a very comfortable resolution, I can't remember the exact vid_mode, but it was about halfway between 320x200 and 640x480. The game lookedr really nice in software mode like that, and played very fluidly (almost never any frame drops or turtle icon).
Well it's not entirely wrong, when they made a new game, that game was a salespitch for the engine they just made, Wolf3D was a game they thought would be really cool and fun to play, and they wanted to show off the engine to prospective buyers, and they did license that engine to others (Blake Stone, Corridor 7), same with Doom, they had Carmack's sexy new engine, so they thought, "Hey, let's make a really cool game to show people how cool the engine is!", and so they did, great sales, a contract to put out a sequel, two third party mission packs (Final Doom), and multiple licensings of the engine (Heretic, Hexen, Strife, Chex Quest, HacX).
I don't get lost in the levels, the levels are just irritating. They're bland, uncreative, require too much backtracking (sometimes with little to no added combat along the way) and in general lack the Doom sensibilities that the first game had. It's a step towards more modern FPS games which I dislike greatly.
The only fun guns in Quake 2 are the railgun and the chaingun. I'm happy using any weapon in Quake barring the normal shotgun, even the axe was better than the stupid laser pistol.
>and that's why I also don't play modern Doom maps and such
You're seriously depriving yourself here, people still make mapsets for vanilla gameplay, with regular Doom style progression and exploration, for instance, Back To Saturn X.
People don't really do linear maps for Doom all that much.
quake 1 isnt very good tbh. Quake 2 literally revolutionized fps gaming with its innovative gameplay and cutting edge graphics that still holds up today. Quake 1 like the doom games have aged like milk and the only people that really enjoys them are those with nostalgia googles
Quake 2 is great in its own way, but I think 1 and 3 have stood the test of time much better.
It's like being punched in the face by God. Quake 1's rocket launcher is just perfect.
Well, if Q2 older sibling is the first fully realized 3d fps and the younger defined multiplayer for years and set golden standard in game engines it's no wonder it is the one awkward middle child of the bunch - even if it is an excellent game in its own right. Still, it had its own identity separate from Q1 and brought some new cool things to the table, like aforementioned railgun and technological advances.
That's why Quake is one of the best games ever made.
With so many games now it's like...people only care about the idea of what they're doing and not what they're actually doing. Like it doesn't matter if the movement is bad or if the enemies are boring or the level design is poor, so long as it's "immersive" or some shit then it's ok if your FPS is bad at being an FPS.
>it's bad that human kind uses abstract thinking
i rather pretend i'm a space marine killing zombie aliens than explicitly sit in a chair and rapidly press buttons and flick a plastic device
I was also into the competitive scene except this was from 96 to 99. I can't imagine that your prize pools were the least bit decent considering it basically died in 1999. 2003, seriously?
Quake was a remake of Doom but with eldritch monsters instead of Biblical demons.
Quake 2 had a cool premise, with frankensteinian cyborgs who harvest fallen foes to make more of themselves, but the engine wasn't really up to the task of delivering on the grisly details that would have made it great. That didn't happen until Quake 4, which imo remains the best Quake to date.
>and still the smoothest game engine ever made.
Sourceports like fuh/ezquake definitely. Original engine, fuck no - caps at 72, no interp for objects so moving objects are stuttery. Mouse input is okay nothing special.
Q2 was smoother than Q1. Quake 1 is the better game though. Not a perfect game but better in basically every regard, (weapons actually balanced unlike Q2 and faster as well, enemy encounters in SP are better designed, enemy AI and design in general is better, level design is more abstract but better designed for gameplay) single and multi barring graphical capability - which sourceports fix much of.
It's more of a tech demo than any other id tech game before it. It's not just a glorified tech demo, it's a well balanced glorified tech demo with great multiplayer. Still, yeah it's a tech demo. It's a bit underwhelming in options but it's damn great for actually playing. There could have been, more.
No one cares what they have to say, also
Kind of makes them all sorts of wrong in so many way.
>but, man, online was where it was at in the Q2 days. gamespy was just getting started and wasn't shit.
Eh, we all played it, but not really. Q2 netcode was dick. Worse than Q1.
>it was impossible to play on 56k...
No it wasn't. It wasn't a bandwidth issue. Q2 has a larger problem with the way it handles latency or rather doesn't. Those problems persist today even on broadband if the server has high latency. It was possible to net 80ms ping with 33.6/56K as well. Less common but possible.
Also, Gamespy was shit, but that's hardly an issue given that pretty much every single game browser in history had been shit barring Kali's game browser which somehow managed to be fucking gold - absurdly quick and making and modifying complex filters for literally everything the server listed in the easiest ways. No one has ever replicated or come close to replicating how great it was. It's likely no one ever will either since steam basically fucked everything up and the world will settle for stupidly less than mediocrity.
The Reckoning > Scourge of Armageddon > Dissolution of Eternity > Ground Zero > Quake II > Quake
Quake plot: Slipgate experiments accidentally connect Earth to dimension of ancient unfathomable lovecraftian horrors. You, a mute soldier, must shoot monsters and collect keys, then find the exit.
Doom: Teleporter experiments accidentally connect Earth to Hell. You, a mute space marine, must shoot demons and collect keys, then find the exit.
Quake 4 had actual characters and some degree of plot beyond the most bare basics because ID focused on the engine and handed the actual game design off to Raven. Who has always done wonderful things with ID engines and should just handle any singleplayer campaign for any game ID ever makes tbh.
>weapons actually balanced unlike Q2
I would argue Q2 weapons are not only pretty balanced, but are kind of an improvement over Q1 arsenal.
Q1 axe vs Q2 blaster torch
If I recall correctly, main char in Q1 using melee weapon is a direct result of this game initially being about a guy with a hammer causing earthquakes or something along those lines. Axe makes sense in gothic-esque enviroment, and it is great for saving ammo when dealing with lone enemies or hitting switches. The attack animation looks silly, though. In Q2 sci-fi cyber aliens a blaster with infinite ammo makes more sense than any futuristic melee weapon would. It has terrible rate of fire and damage output, but it's accurate - and again, it is mostly used to trigger switches from distance, lure enemies, blow up barrels etc.
Q1 vs Q2 shotguns
They are, at fist glance, close analogues to each other. Upon closer inspection it turns out that Q2 versions are much slower, but they also do much more damage - damage rate per second remains roughly constant, but more pronounced periods between shots forces player to be more careful with aiming and timing. Also, Q2 super-shotgun is useful till the very end of the game (even if playing on hard, where enemies don't flinch from shots), just as Q1 double shotgun does.
Q1 nailguns vs Q2 machinegun & chaingun
I think that this is the biggest gripe for people used to Q1 weaponry. Both nailguns have perfect accuracy, no recoil and are using proper projectiles, while machine and chain have crazy spread, recoil (really noticeable on machinegun) and are hitscan based. At the same time super nailgun is just a direct upgrade from nailgun, doubling damage per nail without any drawbacks - once you have it there is no point in using previous version, so it sees very limited use. Q2 machinegun, on the other hand, consumes ammo much slower and is more accurate than chaingun, so they fit different roles - machinegun is good for run and gun exploration and for dealing with groups of weaker enemies, while chain mows down anything in seconds, but it takes a second to start and it fuck'n eats ammo like a pig.
Q1 vs Q2 explosive armaments
This is where Q1 really drops the ball. GL and RL both use the same ammo - this alone renders GL mostly useless after one gets RL. In rare situations where bouncing explosives behind the corner or a wall grant easy and safe kills player is forced to waste precious RL ammo. Q1 GL also has terrible range, that further limits it's already disputable potential. In Q2 GL and RL use their own dedicated ammo types, so trying to fling grenades into a hole or behind a wall does not strip player of ammo for RL. Also Q2 GL has better range with deeper trajectory, enabling it to be used mortar-style, over longer distances. But I'll honestly admit that Q1 RL feels better - it's like having an massive iron cock throwing exploding death in comparison with Q2 serviceable prick of fire ejaculation.
Rest of the weapons can't be directly compared - Q1 LG is just too different from Q2 arsenal of railgun, hyperblaster and BFG. Superweapons from both games have some cool features - LG can be used on enemies standing in water for some additional damage and can shoot from behind walls, cell ammo from Q2 has alternate use as power source for energy shield and railgun can go trough row of weaker enemies with one slug.
>Q1 axe vs Q2 blaster torch
Blaster torch sucks but so does Axe. I never even use the axe anyway and I only use the blaster at the very start before getting the shotgun and then never again.
>Q1 vs Q2 shotguns
Quake 2 shotguns feel like ass and come with ridiculous RNG around the reticule. The SSG is Quake 2's primary weapon. It pretty much dominates most of the game whereas in Quake you use all your weapons in equal doses (except Axe and normal NG once you get the SNG). This is why Quake 2's weapon balance is not as good as the first's in terms of the SP. Quake you use pretty much everything. hell if you have primaries in Quake it's pretty much the SNG and rocket launcher, which is much more interesting than running around using Q2's boring ass SSG on everything.
>Q1 nailguns vs Q2 machinegun & chaingun
>I think that this is the biggest gripe for people used to Q1 weaponry. Both nailguns have perfect accuracy, no recoil and are using proper projectiles, while machine and chain have crazy spread, recoil (really noticeable on machinegun) and are hitscan based. At the same time super nailgun is just a direct upgrade from nailgun, doubling damage per nail without any drawbacks - once you have it there is no point in using previous version, so it sees very limited use.
The reason for having normal NG and SNG is simply a way to scale difficulty differently in different levels.
Quake 2 combat is fucking boring in comparison. It is completely devoid of the first game's dynamics. Everything is merely pop and shot gameplay or circle strafing. That's pretty much it. Everything is so fucking slow and the enemies hardly fucking move. There are no dynamics with the enemy types. The later enemies are merely bullet sponges and nothing more and stand perfectly still, easy to take apart. I don't know how anybody can say Q2 gameplay is better than the first. It's an absolutely ridiculous assertion to make.
Now this is actual weapon balance and functionality.
Another thing Quake 2 fucks up is making weapon switching slow again. Why the fuck wold they do that? Christ.
it's not challenging, its just tedious and slows it down
and 3 is fast switching you moron. not as fast as q1, but still fast as fuck for you to get the weapon you want in a flash.
compare the speed of the weapon switching in this
to fucking quake 2
if you think q2 is remotely hard you're an idiot. zero dynamics, boring game in comparison to the first
sure it's convenient to have guns switch immediately, but it makes picking the correct gun for the battle matter less
your webm just shows how pathetic those faggots are. they're supposed to be q2's rusher enemies. compare those faggots to fiends. they're so fucking useless.
>but it makes picking the correct gun for the battle matter less
top fucking kek. like you even need to strategise that much for quake battles. even if you did have to switch, it takes one moment in cover (oh wow so much fun) and switching to the wanky gun you need to take care of q2's shitty enemies.
people on /vr/ are really fucking pathetic at video games
It's all a matter of enemy placement.
In the webm they are terrible because they are used in an open space.
In Ground Zero and The Reckoning they are actual threat and are often surpringsing, they even fucked me up a couple of times; because enemy placement is actually, you know, good.
Fiends in Quake 1 are terrible because they are used in way too unfair ways; like behind a corner in a tight corridor with hardly any way to maneuveur (even back...).
I'd rather have a Q2 Berserker like in the webm than a Q1 Fiend with "fuck you" placement.
You sound like you're really fucking bad at Quake nesfriend. Fiends are great and are some of the best enemies in that game.
>In the webm they are terrible because they are used in an open space.
They are literally terrible in the entirety of Quake 2. They never pose a threat, fucking ever, in that whole game unless you're a total retard. I can't speak for GZ and I don't remember the Reckoning, but fuck me they're a useless enemy in Q2 (like all of the enemies in Q2 actually).
Wow, I thought that WEBM had sound then I just realised I knew every fucking sound effect by heart and just imagined them in my head while it played.
I have played that game a bit too much.
>They are literally terrible in the entirety of Quake 2
Yeah I know, and actually that's what I wanted to say. They're great in the add-ons though. The problem isn't the enemies themselves, it's how they are used.
As for Q1 I could write an entire essay on terrible enemy placement in that game, it's not just the fiends. I believe Q1 fans overlook it because as they know enemy placement, as well as all the game mechanics, by heart by now, it's obviously never a problem. Just like I can dodge through hitscan bullets in DN3D and know exactly how many bullet of each weapon it takes to kill each enemy in that game. At this point you can't have an objective view on enemy placement unless you have a VERY VERY open mind and have great ability to put yourself in a new player's shoe, which by the look of the vast majority of user made content for FPS games, is a skill very few people have.
I play on Nightmare you retard. See >>2718293. Pic related. You want me to make more webms from the 2 hour playthrough I did yesterday just to see how boring the game is (please say yes because I love making webms and sharing gameplay)? Hint: an enemy didn't kill me at the end, I finally died because I fell in lava.
In all honesty Q2 isn't boring at all. It's a solid shooter but it does NOT hold a candle to first. At all.
>The problem isn't the enemies themselves, it's how they are used.
But that's yet another flaw of Q2's brain dead level design and enemy placement with boring enemies resulting in boring combat situations.
First time I played Quake I was a kid. All I can say is it definitely didn't feel any cheaper than any of the other games I played at that age. Also fiends make a sound before they attack so you always have a chance to react.
Replaying Quake is always fucking fun and engaging and that's what counts in the end. Replaying Quake 2 is okay but it will never have the flow of the first game's combat and is ultimately not as FUN.
Also I like how you imply you're an FPS guru that knows everything about level design and can see this things objectively while I couldn't possibly do so. It's also ironic coming from a Blood fan tbh. I love Blood just as much as Quake but come on, that game is undoubtedly cheaper than Quake but you don't give it shit like you give Quake shit.
Blood has the best enemies and weapons at the time. Enemies have great AI (especially cultists, who are able to go around the level to get you from behind), and enemies complete each others. Weapons are all different and all have their use depending on the enemy or situation; including alt fire.
Enemy use and placement is just challenging in the right way, never too obvious and never too frustrating.
Half of Quake's weapons are the same with different firing rate. Tons of the enemies are pretty much the same, too; I mean how many rusher type is there, like 4 ? The dogs, the fiends, the 2 knights... and again enemy placement is a festival of "fuck the player in the ass" using every enemy in their worst, must unfair possible ways. It'd be like the equivalent of putting chaingun guys from Doom in the distance in a giant room or putting a Commander in DN3D just behind a corner in a tight corridor with no way to backtrack.
I love Quake, but it's ultimately very unfullfilling, it was originally meant to be a completely different game until the deadline grew closer, and they realized "Fuck, this will never work, let's take what we already have and build another Doom", the final product is great fun, but with the general lack of bosses and fairly short length, and lack of variaton, it feels like a tease, the game really has my attention, but there isn't enough of the game to be satisfying.
>Oh, hey, there was gonna be a big bossfight here, a skeleton dragon, was gonna be cool, but we ran out of time, s-sorry, here's two vores
>I know the first boss was cool, but you weren't really expecting more stuff like that, were you?
>Shub Niggurath, the big bad, pretty cool, huh? We can't really put up a big battle though, so here's some monster spawns, and you have to time stepping into that slipgate.
The bossfights in Doom could be slight letdowns, but at least they were battles, the monsters would engage you in battle.
In ep1, the barons were new, in ep2, the Cyber was new, in ep3 the Spider was new, that made them special.
Imagine if there was 3-4 barons in KDITD, and then the boss of that episode is another pair of barons, there's no novelty, and that's why two vores as a boss was such an incredible letdown, at least Shub Niggurath was unique and stood out, even though it ultimately felt like they tried to do Icon Of Sin but different.
I love the world and setting of Q1, and really wish they would have revisited that, with a clearer plan and with time to do it, Q2 was made with a concept in mind and was a finished game, and feels much more varied and complete, like they did what they set out to do, unlike Q1.
Also, Quake 2 was going to have a different name and no relation to Quake 1, but they couldn't get the rights to the name they wanted, so they said fuck it and just called it Quake 2 as release drew closer.
Kind of wish they would have gotten the name they actually wanted, so that the games were differentiated and the idea of doing a sequel to Quake wouldn't have been superceeded by the rest of the series.
Can you picture a game like Quake but with more maps, more enemies per level (though I realize the low monster count was because computers at the time could only handle so much), better bossfights, and just... more?
I mean, it IS a result of not being able to do what you were gonna do, but I think the final concept was really kickass and it should have been explored further.
He quite literally got the job as Quake 2's music guy by sending a CD full of Quake 1-derived tracks and mentioning he would work cheap. He sold himself as NIN's non-union Mexican equivalent, and he even put this story on his website if you think I'm lying.
And if you think NIN doesn't have heavy guitar tracks you aren't familiar with his work at all.
Hey /vr/, I'm trying to catch up on some games I missed when I was younger, mostly because my PC's always lagged behind and couldn't handle much.
I started playing Quake 2, expecting some sort of a thrilling masterpiece, but was really disappointed to find mostly brown and bland industrial-themed levels, unsatisfying weapons, fairly simple enemies and straightforward combat. It has great sound design (I listen to the OST when I drive now), the super shotgun feels fantastic and quad + SS against a room of enemies is a power trip, but there's not much else. After ~2-3 hours it really didn't grab me anymore, I got bored and stopped and didn't resume yet.
I'm constantly playing SOME fast-paced FPS (currently Quake Live, Reflex, Ziggurat), and I don't care a lot about graphics, so it's hard for me to blame my age or standards. Am I doing something wrong here? What's the major appeal of the game for you?
Now I'm not sure I want to try the original Quake, for fear that I'll spoil myself another classic, although I've been told they're not quite similar.
>I started playing Quake 2, expecting some sort of a thrilling masterpiece, but was really disappointed to find mostly brown and bland industrial-themed levels, unsatisfying weapons, fairly simple enemies and straightforward combat.
There you go. Quake 2 in a nutshell, well done. By the way, make sure you're playing with Quake 2's CD soundtrack enabled because it does make the game better.
>Now I'm not sure I want to try the original Quake, for fear that I'll spoil myself another classic, although I've been told they're not quite similar.
It's much, much better. This board is fucking gay. I don't even know what happened, /vr/ always shat on Quake 2 before, especially in those brief Quake general thread experiments we had. Maybe the demographic changed, Idk.
>never too frustrating
Not him but remember the cultists that could one shot you with a stick of dynamite? You can't say that wasn't frustrating.
Also the rats and hands are some of the most frustrating enemies I've fought in FPS games.
Personally I went in Quake expecting a masterpiece and was a bit disappointed, but maybe that's because I was fresh off of DOOM and expected more crazy battles and awesome enemies.
Quake felt a lot slower and simpler for me, and the enemies didn't really feel as satisfying to fight. Weapons also felt a bit lackluster.
But that's just my opinion, I know some people love it more than DOOM, so.
>/vr/ always shat on Quake 2 before
Maybe people are looking at Q2 for it's own merits?
Personally, I think theyveach do things the orther just isn't quite good at.
The design of Q1s monsters was fantastic, but Q2 had a way bigger and more varied enemy roster.
No, you shut the fuck up NESfag. You've had your ass handed to you MULTIPLE times in Quake threads with your "enemy placement is unfair" bullshit, especially when your counter-argument is some variant of "well they didn't do that in Doom!" as if Doom isn't the poster child of the "enemies teleport into a narrow corridor and you take guaranteed damage" aesthetic.
Gimme three examples of Quake's supposed enemy placement bullshit. You never have in all the times I've asked you to actually PROVE your dumb shit. Prove it now or get the fuck out of all the FPS threads forever because I know I'm not the only one who's absolutely sick of your shitposting you fat french dickhead.
>Err everyone used gamespy 3d. No one used Kali.
Well, mostly correct. Some people used Kali. Irrelevant. Gamespy was shit. If you think that line of arguing is worth continuing go back to /v/.
>Also, 80 ping on a 56k is a lie.
Nope. Commentary dismissed because you're wrong and also can't read.
>And the term is HPB.
I never used a term to reference an individuals ping as a class of player. There's no term that needs to be considered here. Fuck off with your pretend ecreds you read about.
>You embarrass me.
Let me play the worlds smallest violin for you. Link to /v/ is at the top and bottom don't let us hold you back.
Lol how was gamespy shit. You found a server and joined in. Do you want msn zone style chat rooms? You could configure gamespy to run nitro proxy etc. What's the gap it's not filling?
56k 80 ping is hilarious. Many had winmodems too. I pinged around 70 with ISDN.
Pretend ecreds rather sounds like you projecting. It was a glorious time, you missed out.
> but are kind of an improvement over Q1 arsenal.
>Q1 axe vs Q2 blaster torch
>blah blah blah blah... Q2's gun has shit rof and damage output - but it's accurate (and slow as fuck so that doesn't matter at all)
>never bring up actual balance issues.
>Q1 vs Q2 shotguns
Let me also not examine the balance of the weapons but instead compare them between two games instead. Congrats on recognizing the games are different. When you want to discuss balance, feel free to start until them you might want to understand that how a game is balanced is across it's own game in it's own weapon, world and mechanics not against other games. We can compare whether games are balanced in comparison in eachother but we can't directly compare distinct things like shotgun or starting weapons because you're comparing completely different contexts and roles.
So I guess... whatever, there's nothing I can add to your post which basically had no point other than suggesting you like Q2 weapons. So have fun with your Q2 weapons with shitty balance.
>shut the fuck up
>Gimme three examples
How about you first decide what you want the guy to do and only then you post?
>get the fuck out of all the FPS threads forever because I know I'm not the only one who's absolutely sick
Sure you are not. But there are also people here who would like to hear what the guy has to say. Preferably in somewhat civil manner, while having a discussion instead of your favorite name calling and caps-lock shouting. You want a place you can yell at people for having different opinion from yours, go ahead and start your own forum/boardchan. But I think you'll find yourself alone there in just few weeks.
Some people like Q2 over Q1. Deal with it.
>sure it's convenient to have guns switch immediately, but it makes picking the correct gun for the battle matter less
That's the opposite of what it does. The only time that's an issue is speedrunning. Because you don't pick the battles typically, you would stumble into them. Thus faster weapon switching allows you to decide which weapon is appropriate for a situation rather than which weapon you're already fucked into having and will potentially cause a situation to be worse.
For example If I instantly drop two shamblers in front and in back of you with say a limited divided cover and you have a rocket launcher selected and the switching is slow - you're pretty much guaranteed to take a hit. If you have faster weapon switching, realizing what they are and the position, you could block your backside from one while switching to a shaft or lightning and take down the second with stunlock before taking the first. You didn't get a choice in which weapon to bring to the battle, you only get a choice of which weapon to always carry in front of you. Likewise you could say, just bring the lightning gun then, and then I spawn thirty little guys in two squads where the rocket launcher could take out whole groups instead of the prior example and you have the same problem. With fast weapon switching you don't. You get to actually react with the proper weapon for a proper situation. Slower weapon switching forces you to either tough shit out or often take unnecessary damage for holding a potentially reasonable weapon in an otherwise unknown situation.
I get your argument, but instantly spawning enemies just don't exist in Q2 and most of the time you know what you will be going against - if not from seeing enemies trough cracks in walls, windows etc. then from hearing them (there is a reason why flying enemies produce proper engine humming and lazorhounds, that lurk in shadow most often, tap their metal paws nervously). Also, you choose what weapon to carry in hand not only according to enemy type, but environment too. Given all that information you can choose your approach style and tools, not only react to what pops from shadows when you turn the corner.
>It was a glorious time, you missed out.
Sounds like someone else is projecting, because I sure as fuck didn't miss shit.
Like I said, 80 ping - I'm not asking you if it was possible, I'm not comparing against yours, I'm stating a fucking fact. Latency isn't fucking bandwidth, though there is a correlation of effect with usage/CPU as well. It depends on various factors as well as ISP. Not every had 80 ping as it was uncommon for modems but still you know, you still can't fucking read so good job there guy.
>What's the gap it's not filling?
Illiteracy apparently. If you're not interesting in reading what I posted then don't bother fucking responding to what I post, no one is forcing you to be here and reply to everything.
>I get your argument, but instantly spawning enemies just don't exist in Q2 and most of the time you know what you will be going against
Well, actually they do, but less common. Also, the speed of an enemy moves and reacts matters as well. While Q2 plays slower and most enemies you come across are slower as well so it's less of an issue. The point still stands on it's own. Slower weapon switching speed is largely worse - though less impactful the slower the entire game is - but it's way more impactful if it's only the player that's slow or limited in movement against faster enemies.
>you're applying Q2 mechanics into Q1, that's silly
I'm applying weapon switching speed to FPS games with weapon switching - which is essentially all of them. I'm explaining how they effect gameplay.
Though I could also note that slow weapon speed as well is just boring as fuck anyway and makes games unfun for those of us already accustomed to playing FPS games where we're already three steps ahead of what's going on just waiting for the game to catch up in a tedious fashion.
how do you even play quake with quakespasm?
I'm waiting for some Heretic mods to release and in the meantime I'd like to try Quake, does it work like Doom where you need .wads or something similar or do I need an actual copy of the game?
>"enemies teleport into a narrow corridor and you take guaranteed damage"
I don't think Doom 1 does this.
Well maybe somewhere in E4, as that episode is stacked against the player pretty hard and gives way less breathing room, but that episode was added after the fact when Doom 2 came out.
I don't think Doom 2 does it.
Final Doom probably does it.
Quake 1 because its straight forward for co-op and DM sessions. Funny this thread is up because I play Q4A multiplayer frequently with some friends on our Shields and we just got off.
Both are completely different games. iD themselves have said it was supposed to be called something else, but the name they wanted was trademarked. Then they were told to whack it under the quake name to get more name recognition
>does it work like Doom where you need .wads
Those wads are almost all of what makes Doom 'Doom'. You have Doom, and without it you could not play Doom with any source port.
So logically for Quake:
>do I need an actual copy of the game?
Yes. You need id1/pak0.pak and id1/pak1.pak which means you need Quake to play Quake with anything.
>remember those bouncy blobs of exploding death that are nigh impossible to hit?
no you just fucking suck.
keep your aim straight and shot steady, run back in the line they're coming at you from and shoot. even without auto aim (i always play with sv_aim 2) they'll just jump into your line of fire.
quake hitboxes are also fucking gigantic ffs
>I don't think Doom 2 does it.
Tricks and Traps opens an entire wall of chaingunners at you. It would be fine on a first time playthrough if you could change weapons quickly (like Quake 1/3) but it takes an hour to change weapons on top of it. In that case the best would be BFG, which also takes a while to finally shoot.
>Final Doom probably does it.
Final Doom has quite a few cheap traps. M3 Aztec for instance spawns archviles and other shit right in your face and even closes the path behind you so you can't escape. It does this twice on that map alone. Again it would be fine if you could switch weapons faster but you can't. This still doesn't however change the fact that Plutonia is easily the best original iwads. Just because it has rare cheap moments doesn't mean the rest of the game doesn't make the best use of monsters and level design by far out of the original wads. Best gameplay dynamics and it's always engaging to replay. Most people on /vr/ don't get this because they're plebs.
I hate that Doom weapon switching is slow as balls. It doesn't really matter for Doom 1 or 2 (apart from the fact that it unneededly slows down gameplay), but in fan made megawads like Scythe 2 where the game spawns a metric fucktonne of enemies at you without warning it 100% requires prior map knowledge. The optimum strategy in these maps on first playthrough is to have the plasma rifle equipped most of the time. BFG will use too much ammo and takes a while to shoot. Plasma rifle is the second most powerful and will dominate formidable trap situations but you still don't have to be too wasteful if it turns out to be only a few fags. It still however won't be appropriate in circumstances where a ridiculous amount of enemies are immediately spawned everywhere and you wish you had the BFG out instead (as it will take too long to switch to it and finally shoot before you're dead and fucked).
Quake is made for you to switch weapons to more powerful ones instantly. People that then complain that it's cheap are dumb. You're supposed to immediately switch to weapons you need to dominate the situations efficiently (and the first shot you hit will also make the enemies flinch) - that's why the game is so fucking good and dynamic, encouraging you to go more and more aggro every time - while Quake 2 is just constant (SLOW AS FUCK) cover based combat vs hitscanners and boring, larger, slow bullet sponge enemies that hardly move. Also all Quake enemies will at least make a noise before attacking you, giving you a chance to escape/react. Somehow NESfag gives Quake shit for 'right angled enemies' that give you a warning before attacking (and aren't even hitscan) but Blood gets a pass for constantly pitting you against right angled, high damage cultists that shoot nearly instantly and without warning if you're head onto them. His reasoning isn't logical.
Quake does have one or two moments I'd call cheap on first run where it spawns a shambler right in front of your face e.g. E1M6. 3 or so cheap moments tops in an entire campaign of three episodes is hardly a big deal. It's not like the other old school shooters didn't also pull crap comparable to this. Besides, if you can't handle the heat, turn down the fucking difficulty. Quake encourages fast movement and reflexes and using the right weapon for the right job, often switching multiple times for a single room encounter. Quake 2 encourages zzz. Boring, slow as fuck cover based combat or circle strafing with its sludgy slow movement speed, the same fucking thing the entire way through. There's not a single moment in Quake 2 that makes me go "Wow. What an awesome little fight that was" because it literally doesn't have any. Hell it gets even more boring as the levels go on and get larger (and emptier) with just one or two easy bullet sponges in wide open spaces, while Quake never loses its sense of intense, high-action, claustrophobic encounters.
>You never have in all the times I've asked you to actually PROVE your dumb shit.
Maybe because I don't feel like responding to mindless insults?
>Gimme three examples of Quake's supposed enemy placement bullshit.
I'll do that. I have a few specific examples in mind, I don't remember the name of the levels but using level warp cheats I should be able to find them easily. I just got back from working 4 hours under heavy downpour and I've got to go shop groceries now, so I'll do that, but later today, in a few hours.
For some reasons the level warp command is kinda of glitchy, it doesn't work more often than it does, so this is a pain in the ass.
Maybe someone knows what's up with that? I'm using Darkplaces. Steam version.
I have a feeling that no matter what I say you're just going to say "lol you suck", but here is an example in E2M6 anyway. You take this elevator and arrive in a tight corridor with in your face a Ogre on your right and a fiend on your left. There is no way there is any space to maneuver for either of them and you're going to get fucked hard unless you know the enemies are there. You can't even use the elevator to go back down in hope to buy some time as the thing is too slow - and most likely you'd get hit by a grenade anyway.
Just around the corner there are FOUR death knights in a tight room. This place is so tight, four death knights is just insane and you have nowhere to go.
Now if we had to translate this to another game, it would be as in DN3D you'd put a commander behind a door between 2 tight corridors; followed by 4 newbeasts in a small room with hardly any way to maneuver.
This is an example that I consider heavy bullshit there - but just looking around each map in fly mode, it strikes obvious to me how enemies are almost always used in ways where they have the biggest advantages possible on the player. Like you know, Ogres always high up, where they can easily throw grenades at you but it's hard for the player to get a shot; Shamblers in tight rooms (sometimes with not even a single pillar or corner to cover!), etc. I know a game has to be challenge the player, but then there is bullshit.
Only the grunts seem to be free from "fuck you" placements.
There is another example I have in mind if the game will let me warp to the right map...
This one right here, E1M6. You fall down in the middle of this room - surrounded by lava - nowhere to go, and you have 3 Ogres shooting grenades at you instantly before you even have time to realize how many there are and where they are. A path opens up, yeah right : stairs leading DOWN, where the grenades also go...
There is no way you'd get through this without getting hit in an unfair way unless of course you already know the level and where the enemies are.
You know, in the room above, just before this one, there is a +100HP powerup. This is no excuse for bullshit and it's typical of Quake's gameplay policy : the game thinks it can put as much shit as it wants as long as it "makes up" for it by giving you powerups or strong weapons.
This is not how I believe good gameplay works. I've been used to have a very strict sort of "arcade" policy with a co-op friend and I; in some of the games we'd play a lot and learn to master, we'd quit the current play if we'd ever lose a single life.
If you get hit, it means the player played badly.
Now though - if the games forces you to get hit one way or another, or if it has bullshit gameplay situations in which there is no way you have time to react, situations where twitch and skill doesn't matter and the only thing that matters is prior knowledge of the game, then it's the game which sucks.
This is why I'd rather play Q2 and some of its boring stuff >>2718313
I've never said I'm all-knowledge FPS guru. I'm voicing my opinion, which is you know the point of this thread; and I'm taking the time and effort to back it up with examples, too.
You're trying to put words in my mouth and make me seem 'bad' just because you disagree.
And here is a third because I was asked 3 examples.
This one isn't as BS as the other two and falls down more into the category of 'traps' (as in level, architecture base traps); but traps are also part of what makes me dislike Q1's gameplay.
So you get to the bottom of this room, a dead end with a switch. It's not a very big room and you're at the end of it, there is lava in the middle too so the only way you can go is where you came from.
Press the switch and you'll have several Ogres starting to bomb you while a Death Knight is already almost next to you.
With no way to maneuver but in direction of the shots - no matter how skilled you are, it's almost impossible to get through this without get hit, unless again, you already know the level and the enemy placement.
>You know, in the room above, just before this one, there is a +100HP powerup. This is no excuse for bullshit and it's typical of Quake's gameplay policy : the game thinks it can put as much shit as it wants as long as it "makes up" for it by giving you powerups or strong weapons.
>This is not how I believe good gameplay works. I've been used to have a very strict sort of "arcade" policy with a co-op friend and I; in some of the games we'd play a lot and learn to master, we'd quit the current play if we'd ever lose a single life.
>If you get hit, it means the player played badly.
>Now though - if the games forces you to get hit one way or another, or if it has bullshit gameplay situations in which there is no way you have time to react, situations where twitch and skill doesn't matter and the only thing that matters is prior knowledge of the game, then it's the game which sucks.
I'm quoting this because this is important to understand how I see video games, and therefore why I think Q1 has bad gameplay.
Tons of players think that "it's fine" when a game forces you to get hit as long as it "makes up" for it one way or another. For instance, Duke Nukem 3D, my favourite FPS game. First thing you do is fall down that vent and take dmg - the game makes up for it by putting a health pack just where the player lands. Now I consider this bad.
If you don't have a problem with that, if you can take bullshit as long as it's "made up for", then half of the problems I have with Quake aren't problems for you.
OK, you actually posted what you consider proof. I'm going to lead off by chiding you for considering ogres to be difficult enemies to outmaneuver since the strafe function completely negates their grenade attack and remind you that they pre-alert players to their presence with sound cues you can hear for quite some distance away.
As for your specific examples, I'll tackle them head on.
Stop attacking both enemies head on right away. You're already aware that you're in a tight corridor (which still gives enough room to sidestep both the grenades AND the fiend) and you only trigger the fiend by advancing into his line of sight - this wouldn't happen if you just deal with the ogre first.
Yeah, there are 4 death knights. And when the ogre and the fiend are dead, you can fight them one at a time with all the extra room to backpedal with. Also the quantity isn't an issue because they're behind 3 different corners and it's nearly impossible to fight all four at once because at least one of them is standing in the hallway that leads to the rest.
You can see and hear all of those ogres ahead of time by looking down through the floor above's grates. You can also see the area you'll land on ahead of time through the gaping pit you eventually jump through. And you subverted the example entirely when you correctly managed to remember that you can just run down the stairs that open and bypass having to fight the ogres from that location entirely. I see no problem with how this is laid out and cannot come around to whatever point you're trying to make here.
OK, so you really when ogres arrive, clearly. Now I really AM starting to think I can use the "you just suck" argument here because this is ANOTHER example where there's plenty of room that you can't seem to use properly. That death knight is not "nearly next" to you, he spawns behind the grate, and is vulnerable to being shot as soon as you push that button.
Alternatively, you can hop the gap over the lava, run back up the stairs and deal with things one a time. You also aren't in range of the ogres when you push that button, you failed to mention. Well, I know that, and I suspect you knew that too because they have a limited range and spawn well outside of it. Your range as a player is anywhere you can look, theirs is limited by how far they shoot their grenades, which is frequently either way outside of range, or so close when they ARE in range that sidestepping causes the grenades to bounce harmlessly behind the player.
I can read just fine, thanks. You hate that there's a powerup before a spot that punishes inattentiveness. That's great, believe me, those luxuries disappear after episode 2, where there isn't any hand-holding. There's exactly, EXACTLY, ONE instance of guaranteed damage in all of Quake 1, which we all know what it is because you hate environmental interactivity and never fail to bring it up whenever it suits your purpose. But as you've said, Duke does the exact same thing, so it's not fine that Quake does it, but you're willing to call it a misstep when Duke does it. Well tough shit, it's a misstep when Quake did it too, then and therefore, excusable.
You're not a very good Quake player, this is the impression I'm getting here. But you don't get to act like the game is the problem when I don't have any of these maneuverability problems like you do. You're inattentive and don't pay attention to sound cues, every monster in Quake except for the peeny little death knights that go down in two shotgun blasts give away their positions via sound. Are you just trying to set speedrun records your first time out and YOLOing your way through everything because this is the same fucking argument we've had three times before.
>Now I really AM starting to think I can use the "you just suck" argument
Yeah well, that is pretty much the idea of your entire post.
I can play just fine thank you, I know this is not a very good "skill calculator" but, just to give an idea, I beat every "single player" level of Q3A on "Nightmare" difficulty. When I was 12. So I can aim and move just fine, and it's not like Quake's enemy patterns are any hard to learn.
I still believe you wouldn't get out of any of these situations without getting hit on your first play(s); and I still believe it's not a problem only because you know the game really well now. Even some of your explanations on how to go through these 3 examples pretty much sound like you have to know each precise step to take to go out of the situations safely, and which one might even only have time to perform when he already knows the game. Quake is a fast game. Having such situations in which the player is expected to perform several split-second and perfectly stepped movements in a row in small rooms is asking too much of him (and can also shorten gameplay possibilities)
>But as you've said, Duke does the exact same thing, so it's not fine that Quake does it, but you're willing to call it a misstep when Duke does it
I said I thought it was bad in Duke. Now the thing is, Duke doesn't do it often. On top of my head I can't even think of a second example. While I feel like most of Q1's gameplay is based on the principle that throwing as much shit as possible at the player is fine as long as it's "made up for" one way or another.
I love your anger, and can't disagree with your point. Quake 1 blows the follow-ups out of the water in terms of tension, design, replayability and atmoshpere - if not only the vanilla game but the two brilliant addons as well.
Personaly, i've always thought that Quake weapons are really handicapped, especially after Doom ones, and deliberately made that way to make the game harder.
Well, that's pretty much your standard #1 which is just here to remember that if you ran out of ammo in a game like that then probably you need to play something else
Way too underpowered even for the standard mid-90s #2.
Only effective at point blank range, anything else = easily 10 shells to kill an ogre.
The combination of rate of fire, projecticle speed, damage and ammo quantity make it an ultimate ammo waster
Sees a very limited use due to design
Overpowered end-game thing that needs to be balanced with small ammo amount on levels
These two are actually work as intended
Quake 2 is the better game. More story, more direction. I have a love-hate thing with Quake 1 though. It has it's moments but mostly it feels tech demo-ish because the lack of direction. And of course it being a study on the color brown ain't helping.
>You take this elevator and arrive in a tight corridor with in your face a Ogre on your right and a fiend on your left. There is no way there is any space to maneuver for either of them and you're going to get fucked hard unless you know the enemies are there. You can't even use the elevator to go back down in hope to buy some time as the thing is too slow - and most likely you'd get hit by a grenade anyway. Just around the corner there are FOUR death knights in a tight room. This place is so tight, four death knights is just insane and you have nowhere to go.
If I was playing this level for the first time with my current abilities as a Quake player webm related is pretty much exactly what I'd do (well, actually I'd turn right for the invincibility pickup from that obvious secret that opens when I shoot the ogre with the RL as any good player would be doing. But just to prove a point I ignore it here, only to go back afterwards to show you another aspect of why your post is dumb). It's also quite apparent that I don't know this map all that well anyway.
What you're actually helping me point out is the very beauty of Quake and one of the many reasons it's superior to the second. This game forces you to think quickly, switch up your weaponry, and changing weapons is INSTANT so you have no penalty for switching. You have to immediately bring up the right weapon for the right job (while managing ammo) and dominate the situation lest you get fucked. This is what all these Quake 2 plebs just don't understand... and apparently you don't understand it either. High difficulty =/= cheap. Any experienced Quake player playing this map for the first time would have probably done something very similar to how I'm playing here and would have survived. Cheapness is where a really skilled player would die regardless and would only be able to survive by knowing the map beforehand. That's just not the case here, nor is it the case in your other two examples.
>I have a feeling that no matter what I say you're just going to say "lol you suck"
Well I'm sorry but it seems to be the truth. If you think you should be able to stand still and shotgun everything then Quake SP just isn't for you. Your other two examples of "cheapness" are also both bullshit, and both situations could be managed fine by a good player on first playthrough.
>This one right here, E1M6. You fall down in the middle of this room - surrounded by lava - nowhere to go, and you have 3 Ogres shooting grenades at you instantly before you even have time to realize how many there are and where they are. A path opens up, yeah right : stairs leading DOWN, where the grenades also go...
Ogres aren't hitscan. They lob grenades. Literally strafe from side to side to avoid them. If you're not fast enough that's your problem.
You exaggerate so much. Webm incoming to show you how retarded you are, again first playthrough after centuries. I literally stopped midway through my post and recorded another playthrough. Now, it seems I know this map better than I did the one in the previous webm example, but still. How different would it be if it was my first time here (with my current Quake ability) after hitting the switch downstairs? Literally not much. I'd hear the sound to my right and turn, switch to GL instantly when seeing them. Maybe one grenade would hit me, AT BEST, and then the GL would fuck them up just the same. Maybe the HK might have managed to get a bit closer but then I'd just whip out my SNG and fuck him up just the same. This part *really* is not cheap my friend.
The funny thing is Quake does have some rare moments that are cheap (like pretty much every retro shooter ever) but these aren't even examples of them. They're actually all examples of how you need to git gud. In all of Ep3 during this playthrough, there were only two moments that I concede are cheap. In my Ep2 playthrough for the earlier webm, there was not a single moment that I thought was cheap. In ep1 I can only think of a single cheap moment, and it's also in E1M6, but it isn't the moment you're talking about.
Webm related is the first cheap moment from Ep3 as ogres fall on either side of you and there's nothing you can do the first time (later you might strafe jump past quickly). Note, however, that it is still circumvented by the health pickup... thoughtful level design?
Then there’s this. Shambler spawns right in front of you and your path is cut off from behind. Yeah, cheap, no doubt, same as the cheap E1M6 Shambler spawn. However, the game does give you an invincibility here right before it, and the secret is quite obvious as the light is a bright yellow while the others are white. If players don’t pay attention to their surroundings and don’t pick up on shit like this then fuck them. They deserve to get fucked tbqh.
>Though I could also note that slow weapon speed as well is just boring as fuck anyway and makes games unfun for those of us already accustomed to playing FPS games where we're already three steps ahead of what's going on just waiting for the game to catch up in a tedious fashion.
Exactly. That's pretty much the entirety of Quake 2's campaign, too.
>Only effective at point blank range
I agree that it's a pretty weak shotgun, but at what other range are you ever going to use one? Shotguns are practically melee weapons in classic FPS. I can't fathom why you'd even think to use it at long range, especially when you still have shotgun #1 which is fairly accurate.
Eh, Plutonia is OK, I like the design and visuals, but TNT appeals to me a lot more. You need to enhance your calm by the way, Plutonia isn't everyone's cup of tea.
Doom 1 is by far the most fun, I like the atmosphere of the maps, E2 is amazing.
I like Q1 and Q2, Q1 has a much more appealing atmosphere and the combat is faster (though there aren't nearly as many monsters, which is a letdown).
Meanwhile, Q2 is much more coherent and concentrated, because the game is pretty much what it was set out to do. I think the maps are fun enough (though backtracking can sometimes be tedious), the music is great, and all the weapons are way more colorful and interesting (except Q1s supernailgun, the roaring, booming torrent of projectiles is hard to best, the noise is perfect).
I also don't mind doing some cover based combat if it's optional, typically in an FPS game I'll go half and half between getting behind cover and then running out all guns blazing like a madman, Q2 lets you do both and I like that, reminds me of Duke3D
Ultimately, I don't like comparing 1 and 2 because they ultimately each have their standout flaws and standout greatness, and they're really not at all the same kind of games, I prefer to look at each of them separately, neither do I compare them to 3 because that is a VERY different game.
>People that then complain that it's cheap are dumb.
I don't. My beef with 1 is that it's really very short and noticably unfinished, I love it for what it is on it's own, but I hate that it doesn't reach all the way.
>f I was playing this level for the first time with my current abilities as a Quake player webm related is pretty much exactly what I'd do
When you know the game it's physically impossible to play "pretending it's the first time you play"; that and your "current Quake skills" don't represent a first play either.
Like I said hardly any enemy placement or trap can feel cheap when you know the game already, no matter how hard you try to pretend you don't know it.
>Is there any Quake fan made level pack that is faithful to the original game's design philosophy?
Thankfully not, not many user created content has the "masochist gameplay" philosophy of the original game. Quake is one of these games where I enjoy add-ons and usermaps better than the original.
>When you know the game it's physically impossible to play "pretending it's the first time you play"
I wasn't 'pretending it's the first time'. I was demonstrating how I play it now and showing why I don't think it would be that different if it was my first time playing it, provided I had the same level of Quake skills that I do now. Try to actually read the posts and understand what I was saying.
> that and your "current Quake skills" don't represent a first play either.
You don't understand the point. The first time I ever played Quake of course I wasn't nearly as good as I am now. That's why you play on an easier setting and not Nightmare. Had I played this shit on Nightmare the first time I was ever playing Quake of course I'd probably get my ass handed to me (just like if someone plays Doom on Nightmare for the first time ever he'd get buttfucked). The point is though, that if I had all the hypothetical Quake experience I have now and played that map for the first time, I seriously doubt that situation would get the best of me. It's thus not cheap, it's high difficulty. Just because you have no fucking twitch reflex and are unable to turn to sound cues and switch to the right weapon when you need it doesn't mean that everybody else is a fucking idiot, too.
You literally fucking suck NESfag. I have no respect for you anymore. Used to but Jesus Christ you're actually a shitter.
>I was demonstrating how I play it now and showing why I don't think it would be that different
>just like if someone plays Doom on Nightmare for the first time ever he'd get buttfucked
Actually Doom on Nightmare isn't a correct comparison to make since that undoubtedly requires prior map knowledge rather than just skill and I'm arguing here that if somebody is a good Quake player he could do these situations just fine if he was running them for the first time ever on Nightmare. There is literally nothing cheap about those situations and I've explained why in the accompanying posts to webms. NESfag is a shitter that sucks at Quake and clearly doesn't understand the game.
I don't find Quake 2 boring and I don't get why people say that, the combat felt largely like Doom and many times the fighting felt exhilirating, like it does in Doom, Half-Life, or Duke.
There's exploration, secret levels, fun weapons, and the game felt just as long as it needed to be, but maybe I'm just different.
I'll admit that the cool graphics caught me like a storm when I was a little kid, but what ultimately stayed with me was how fun it was. Quake 1 was fun, but to me, Quake 2 was even more fun.
Just as I -really- get into the enjoyment of Quake, it's about to end, it really feels like a tease like that, it could badly use about 3 more levels in each ep and then real bossfights for each.
I was disappointed in Quake 3 having no single player, but it was still a fun game in it's own right.
I found the addons underwhelming honestly.
>I have no respect for you anymore.
How the fuck did you in the first place? He's a bonified troll. I've had him filtered for ages since all the shit that comes out of his mouth is pure drek and not worth killing off the braincells reading his stupidity.
I understood that you talk about double-barreled one. Maybe it is just my memory, but Doom and Blood ones had way lesser spread. As for the power, i think the feeling of Q1's SSG underperformance comes not from weapon itself but from the fact that Q1's most common foe, Ogre, is way fatter then Doom's Imps or Cultists from Blood. Come to think of it, enemies in Quake can take a lot more beating then in other shooters of the time.
Aye, it's because there's less of them. But even ignoring monster beef, the SSG is still noticibly weaker than most. It only does 56 damage with a perfect hit, not enough to one-shot a player. Compare to Q2's 120 damage or Doom2's 'fuck you' damage.
>Come to think of it, enemies in Quake can take a lot more beating then in other shooters of the time.
Because you're supposed to switch it up to more powerful weapons so as to not allow the enemies to rush you in its more compact situations. That's where the urgency and threat of Quake's combat comes from. It's not a game where you just run around brainlessly SSG'ing everything and it's better for it.
People that complain about Quake's 'bullet sponge enemies' or shit like having a 'weak shotgun' are dumb. If you play the game right by using the breadth of your arsenal as you should be doing the enemies don't feel overpowered at all. Every weapon is a unique instrument and if you're playing the game right you'll be changing up your weapons constantly for each encounter, not just for weapon specificity but also for ammo management.
Quake 1's SP combat feels like Quake 3's MP translated as best as it ever was to a single player campaign. Quake 2 combat is generic, uninspired '90s FPS with an emphasis in cover, and there's never any real threat to it if you're not dumb to not hide or strafe a little when you're being shot at by Q2's boring enemies. Quake encourages speed and fast movement from a full 360 degree threat, above and below, constantly making use of all your weapons and dominating the enemies appropriately, while Quake 2 encourages hiding for a moment before popping out and shooting again, pretty much the entire way through. It's too slow and the guy in Q2 feels like a fat motherfucker; probably gets stuck between his table and chair when getting up at McDonald's.
I love both games, but I think what makes Q1 so good is how much more complex it is. In Q2 I can walk around with pretty much any weapon and I can do reasonably well since most of the enemies aren't that different. With Q1 though you have to figure out which weapon works best based on how different the enemies are and how different much of the architecture is. Everything about Q1 felt like it was trying to kill you, there were traps everywhere. In Quake 2 (and most later FPS games) the levels are meant to look like more realistic places, so the levels seem more predictable and less dangerous. Quake level design was more interesting and abstract, and you can tell that it was designed more based on how the levels are played than how they look.
I only started playing Quake SP in 2013 after beating it once in like, 1996 and then never touching it again. I played through it on nightmare and I didn't use mid-level saves.
Quake is not a hard game when played with mouselook. Even on nightmare enemies can be staggered (especially fiends which can be stopped mid-flight) and a lot of enemy types can be easily baited into switching to melee.
The examples you posted provide no threat to the prepared player. The SSG staggers an ogre once for free and both enemies are extremely vulnerable to nailguns. If you're running around with the GL, I could see having a problem, but that's because you've made a mistake.
I can now beat the game without dying and I hardly have it memorized. There are a handful of segments that I have memorized because they are especially insidious -- I think all Quake players know the gold key shambler on E1M5 -- but very little demands the kind of foresight that your posts insinuate that they do.
Honestly, I think you should evaluate your own skill level and how your playing compares to others.
>If you're running around with the GL, I could see having a problem, but that's because you've made a mistake.
Running around with any weapon drawn is pretty much never a mistake in Quake because there's no penalty for switching weapons. Weapon switching is instant so it takes no time at all to get yourself the weapon you need for the right job. If you don't have your keys remapped to more convenient ones from the default numbered keys well then you're a retard.
I didnt say a word about owerpowered or bulletsponge enemies and they didnt even feel that way. I only said that they are noticeably fatter than in most of era's shooters, and that's objective. I also agree with your point that Q is about fitting yourself to quickly changing environment, but - for my taste, anyway - the
>Every weapon is a unique instrument
comes with the price of player's freedom to choose the weapon and adjust the playstyle to using it. And it is not bad, it is just the one of design ideologies. They went too far the other direction in Q2 however, with SSG being the ultimate argument in SP.
>Q2 however, with SSG being the ultimate argument in SP.
I don't get that. The SSG has almost outlived it's usefulness by the time you get the RL. It's not a bad fallback weapon by any means, but it hardly stands out in late game. It's too slow and you need to be in melee range. RL, GL, hyperblaster and railgun are all far more useful, and with 4 different ammo sources you're not gonna have to fall back on the shotty often.
Q2 RL feels like shit. It's way too slow, both in firing and rocket speed, and feels like a cheap plastic toy shooting styrofoam rockets. It's also weak as motherfuck. I suspect it's this way to give it more balance with the Railgun for when you finally get that weapon.
Anyway, no, RL certainly does not replace the SSG. You can't, for example, shoot RL at close range without hurting yourself and SSG is hitscan while Q2's rockets take literal years to fly to the enemy. SSG is also more powerful than RL (which is fucking dumb) if used from close range.
*As for HyperBlaster vs SSG, sure HB is better for distance enemies but most of the time I'd still rather be using SSG considering they made HB feel like shit with that shitty delay between pulling the trigger and having it shoot. I use Q2's GL next to never. I'd use it a lot more if weapon switching was instant but there's no real need to switch away from SSG just to shoot a grenade around the corner when it takes so long to switch and you could just strafe back and forth and kill with SSG anyway.
*actually even if you could change weapons fast I would still hardly use GL considering SSG is much stronger from close range anyway and for longer range enemies I'd rather just whip out the chaingun then play slow ass peakaboo with GL for a few seconds longer than I'd have to.
yeah I never use GL in Q2 ever tbh
That's not anywhere near 20 years of experience friend and it's hardly impressive gameplay. This is though:
If you're short on time, at least watch the 5:39 - 6:29 segment 'cause it's so fucking awesome.
Not that anyone should ever be playing Quake on Nightmare (a hidden difficulty) on their first ever try anyway.
Reasons why 2 is better:
>Levels aren't endless brown corridors, you can actually get a sense of the architecture and thus not get lost
>You can pick up items and use them only when needed
>Ogres are no longer bullet sponges
I've honestly never played on any difficulty besides Nightmare for more than a couple of minutes. I'm not even sure what the difference is between hard and Nightmare. From the limited testing I've done it seems like the monster placement is the same, but it doesn't seem to have any real effects like Doom's Nightmare skill...
You don't get my point.
I've never said any of these were particularly hard. I got out of most situations alive.
I'm saying these situation have shitty unfair situations. By that I mean that you're going to be hit and take dmg (as little as that dmg may be) in a way that's impossible to avoid unless you already know ahead what's coming for you.
Now - you may only get hit once and go out of there killing every baddie with no problem; but that one hit in some situations is unfair and that's what I call bad, unfair, design.
The problem being, this design phylosophy is all over the game and the game thinks it's okay as long as it makes up for it with powerups or whatever.
It's still bad because it pretty much forces the player to get hit in ways he couldn't avoid - again, as little as that dmg may be- very often, and it gets aggravating.
I'm sure most players don't care. As long as it's made up with health packs around and other supplies. I do mind, because when I play games I grew to care about every single hit.
Excuse me, what? Literally only hitscanners in the game are grunts (shambler telegraphs his attack) and arachnids are very rare and have slow projecticle. There are some nasty nailgun traps, granted, but if you are getting that much damage tht you concider inescapable from that rooster of enemies then you have some gitting gut to do.
I have never played the second Quake. But the first one, well...
I really liked the first episode. The level design just works so well together. I like it when levels have a sense of connected progress and strong visual diversity, and that feeling was definitely there in the first episode.
I sadly can't say the same about the other episodes, who felt more monotonous.
One of my favorite levels is definitely The Lost Mine. The level design in Quake is mostly just as abstract as in Doom, but the mine level to me sticks out because it actually feels like a mine. I love it when games more known for this abstract level design are used to create levels with a bit more practicability in mind.
I know Nightmare makes enemies faster, like ogres fire grenades faster, shamblers charge up attacks are faster, all enemies react faster. I'm pretty sure it also puts more enemies in levels. Easy enough to test out tbh but I gotta head out now!
Anyway Quake on Nightmare is easy tbh. /vr/ is a bitch holy fuck. Still harder than Quake 2 though which is a game for grannies.
here are some moments from the last time I played Quake 2
pretty mundane stuff tbh
Q1's biggest issue is that mapping for it isn't nearly as easy as Doom (where it's literally as easy as "if you can draw a map on paper, you have a Doom map"). It's much more effort to get going with Quake mapping, and making sure the light stays in and everything
there'd still be a lot of active Quake mod support if mapping for it was easier
It doesn't help that in modern Doom source ports, you could quite reasonably make highly vertical Quake-like level design and have slopes and water and stacked rooms and shit, and things only get a little difficult during those portions of level editing (and with extremely minor compromises, you can simplify your workload by far and still keep extensive verticality), so people end up modding Doom instead.
There'd be a lot more active Quake mod support if it didn't have a bunch of sequels.
There'd be more support if the absolute best modders didn't get actual careers and work on their own projects for actual remuneration.
There'd be more support if nerds like us could stop fighting and just agree that Q1 was superior instead of splitting the vote, as it were, and actually all made a single unified community like Doom has. Instead we have multiple splinter communities for q1, 2, 3, live, wars, etc, it's fucking exhausting.
No matter what enemy type this game throws at you, or what combination of enemies it throws at you, ultimately it all mostly feels like the same thing. Hide in cover for a few seconds (maybe select a more powerful gun if you need it) and come out to take a few shots, or strafe a bit in Q2's sludgy speed to avoid getting hit. It’s all too slow and far too flat footed compared to the original, completely lacking all the dynamics of the first game. The original is so much faster and the sense of urgency is so much more apparent. The rushers in Q2 are so fucking useless and hardly make a difference. They are, like everything else in the game, far too slow.
it's like you're purposely playing Q2 even slower than it actually is
>>Using the machinegun for everything
Did you see the other webms? In the two webms you quoted I only have Blaster, SG and MG by that point. MG is clearly the best weapon to use in those situations. Hell I would like to switch up my Q2 weapon use more mid combat and I'd do that but having to wait three hours just to change weapons makes me not feel like doing it. Even if I an inferior weapon out I'd often just rather use it to finish the job rather than wait extra to switch to a better weapon when the end result won't be different (i.e. the enemy will be dead). Quake 2's ammo management is also not anywhere near as important as the first game's and you're showered with ammo throughout the game - not that it really matters considering how viable every weapon is regardless.
>>retreating to cover
On Nightmare enemies don't flinch and are fairly bullet spongy as well as being hitscan. It is therefore going to be a very cover based game unless you have map foreknowledge. Quake 2 does not encourage speedy aggro gameplay the way the original does.
I don't understand you.
You complain that enemies don't flinch and that you HAVE to take cover, because you play on Nightmare.
Why don't you play on normal instead?
Just downloaded Quake 1 again, and it is indeed much more fast paced and enjoyable gameplay-wise than Quake 2.
Still, Quake 2 is miles better than any modern FPS, with their dumb as shit pickup mechanisms, cover systems, in-game cinematics, limited sprinting, etc.
I guess what I like more about Quake 2 is the theme, and level variety. Everything in Quake 1 looks about the same, while Quake 2's environments change a bit throughout the game.
I feel like I'm progressing in Quake 2, while Quake 1 takes me back to the Crash Bandicoot-like warp room for the next set of levels. Quake 2 feels more like an actual campaign, while Quake 1 feels like a set of deathmatch maps, especially because you lose all your equipment when you're done with each set of levels, and because each level has no connection to other levels.
Not really. Quake's emphasis is far more on dodging and movement than it is about going into cover against hitscan enemies. The game also constantly sets traps and forces you into situations where it's dodge or hurt. Pretty much the stuff that NESfag was crying about earlier.
>Still, Quake 2 is miles better than any modern FPS, with their dumb as shit pickup mechanisms, cover systems, in-game cinematics, limited sprinting, etc.
I agree. Honestly I like Quake 2; I'm being too harsh on it because OP made a guaranteed replies thread. I just like the first one way, way more. I could understand why someone would like the second one more I guess (I also liked Q2 more as a kid) since Q1 does look pretty samey. But in terms of gameplay and level design (combat situations) I feel like the first absolutely kills the second and is ultimately way more fun to play.
Even in terms of aesthetics however I also prefer the first game. I love Quake's sound design for starters. I also prefer its abstract world but again I could understand if it's not everybody's thing. I used to think it looked bland too but something about that murky world and its monsters coupled with the distinctive noises and Trent Reznor audio backdrop ended up feeling so fucking right. One thing I really appreciate in video games is where they deliver a genuinely unique and one of a kind atmosphere. Quake is one of the games that does that for me.
Quake 4 realized the Strogg so much better than Quake 2 that 2 is just plain obsolete now. The Q2 engine just didn't allow the detail necessary to do justice to patchwork cyborg enemies or their conversion facilities. The improved Doom 3 engine used for Q4 was perfect for that.
You mean Hard, right? You want more monsters to kill.
But yeah, fuck skill 4 (it's not Nightmare). Such a lazy implementation of a higher skill level that it didn't warrant a menu entry.
>MG is clearly the best weapon to use in those situations
I disagree. There were several times that you could have sped things up with grenades, the ball scratcher and even the blaster (100% accuracy, it's better for those small fry at a range than you'd think)
Honestly the machinegun is the absolute least useful weapon in the entire Quake series.
No, the Quake 2 Stroggos are superior to the Quake 4 ones.
The Quake 2 designs looked more iconic and memorable, the Quake 4 ones are tryhard edgy shit that does not do the game universe justice. They could also just as well be in Dead Space or a few other tryhard horror games as well.
Quake 1 for single-player, definitely, as Q2 had pretty awful level design compared to Q1's.
For multiplayer it's more even. I'd have to go with Q1, but I think that one comes more down to weapon preferences. Q2's railgun was pretty fun.
>No it wasn't. It wasn't a bandwidth issue. Q2 has a larger problem with the way it handles latency or rather doesn't
Even Quake 3 in its unmodified form is (or at least was, I haven't tried recently) practically unplayable due to a complete lack of latency handling.
IIRC, there was a mod called InstaUnlagged that largely fixed the issue and made it so you no longer had to guess where the other players would be a second or two later in order to hit.
>rocketjumpfest that is Q1
Rocket-jumping is not required at any point in Q1 that I can remember. It's just a likely unintentional side-effect of the game mechanics that people discovered could be exploited to skip parts or reach otherwise unreachable locations at the cost of health.
>You take this elevator and arrive in a tight corridor with in your face a Ogre on your right and a fiend on your left. There is no way there is any space to maneuver for either of them and you're going to get fucked hard unless you know the enemies are there. You can't even use the elevator to go back down in hope to buy some time as the thing is too slow - and most likely you'd get hit by a grenade anyway.
I played through Quake on Nightmare a year ago or so, and I don't recall this being a problem ever. Sure, you DO need to be lightning fast, dodge stuff (mostly fiends) and take cover (shamblers), but that's a significant part of what makes the game great. If you prefer to just stand still in front of enemies and gun them down, then Quake might not be for you.
>I know a game has to be challenge the player, but then there is bullshit
I can't really think of many places in Quake that I would consider truly bullshit. Probably one of the worst examples IMHO would be the room in E1M5 with the key where the walls lower to reveal a shambler and several fiends that will pretty much insta-kill you unless you know about it in advance and get the secret quad damage by going through the back of the portal before.
There's also a somewhat similar case in E1M6 where a shambler spawns blocking your way and trapping you with no way to take cover after picking up the key and will kill you almost instantly unless you take precautions against it by having lots of health and picking up the secret quad damage immediately before picking up the key, then quickly kill the shambler by nailgunning it before it can obliterate you.
These are two of only very few situations in the game that felt more like a puzzle to be figured out than a challenge of skill and that I think could be considered somewhat bullshitty since you have no proper way to deal with them unless you already knew about them beforehand and discovered the hidden quad-damages.
Let me rephrase, you shitchucking faggot, the startup is short, and if you've got even the slightest skill you act with this delay in mind.
I mean, do you cry about the delay of the BFG in Doom?
I've never been bothered by weapon swapping taking a second, I just plan for that shit in games.
>alright, I'll run out into this courtyard, emptying my SMG into this group as I strafe by, and in between those pillars
>the surviving guys come wandering towards my position and I've already got my shotgun out to deal with them
If you can't adapt to a game having a slight delay for switching weapons or reloading, then you're not cut out for that kind of game.
>If you can't adapt to a game having a slight delay for switching weapons or reloading, then you're not cut out for that kind of game.
lmao. yeah q2 is so hard I'm having such a tough time "adapting" because I killed some retards with a machine gun instead of a blaster.
Not talking about Q2 specifically, just any game where there's a slight delay for things like switching and junk.
I never was bothered by weapon switching in Doom, Duke or other Quakes, if you got fucked when switching weapons, well that's just your own fault.
>I never was bothered by weapon switching in Doom, Duke or other Quakes
you're okay with slow weapon switching 'cause your brain works slowly too m8. I never "got fucked" by slow weapon switching either (but what a beautiful strawman). I prefer it to be fast because it makes the game more interesting and dynamic. It results in less down time between shooting and less time spent in cover while you switch. I'm sorry you're too slow to understand such a simple concept
anybody can simply hide for a moment if they have to and select the weapon they need, which is what I do in plenty of those webms above, or just switch out in the open because whatever/the situation might be more urgent. however not everyone would be able to think quickly and be switching through weapons on the fly several times during combat. judging by your posts you clearly don't do this yourself even when you have the facility of fast weapon switching because you're an idiot. If somebody's able to switch weapons mid combat several times in a single fight, that same person is able to also hide for a moment (if he has to) in order to bring out another weapon. fucking RETARD.
What do you think takes more skill? Thinking extremely quickly and immediately switching weapons based on the optimum allocation like in this video
>hurrrrr I'm play dewm dere are sum cacoz dere I gez I shud uze da chaingun
>wow I'm so smart I swiched to da chaingun! xDDD
Fuck off retad.
I know it's a joke post, but obviously an ogre on his own is gonna be useless, just like an imp on his own would be useless. What matters is how its used with the level design and what enemy combos are used. How does the dynamic shift with an ogre and a fiend for instance?
I'm just making excuses to post more webms.
It's level design and gameplay like this that makes Quake so much superior to the second. An ogre guards some platforming with his grenades and zombies are interspersed between the platforms. I really don't get how people can say this shit isn't really well thought out, even if id supposedly didn't have a lot of time to make it.
The single moment I thought was cool in my last Q2 playthrough was here >>2730541. There I was forced to run forward on a narrow platform in order to evade the Tank's rockets, rather than the same old shit that was happening throughout the rest of the game. The original Quake is full of unique situations like that. It really knows how to use its enemies well with the level design.
Eh, prediction was a part of the game. It's why LPB's were hated, they didn't have to do it. It was playable when your opponents had to play the same 'guessing game' you did. The only classic Quake game that was not fine on 300 ping was Quake 1 before QuakeWorld.
I'm sorry you're too slow to realise you're replying to different people.
But never mind that, you said you like it fast but your webms are slow. The game doesn't force you to to be that slow. In my last post I told you ways you could have SPED SHIT UP and you just go "lol enjoy your slow weaponswitch".
Nah, mate. just nah.
You're actually crying because I didn't change to a blaster at some point in these two >>2730384 >>2730392, like it would have made the slightest difference. I think you're a fucking idiot dude.
Also Q2 is not a game that emphasises speed on Nightmare which is why nobody speed runs the game on that mode.
>He needs instant weapon switch to play the game
>He can't deal with a bit of balance
I think you should at the Quake 2 webms above and see if I problem with slow weapon switching. Like I said, all it does is slow the game down needlessly and results in campier gameplay. The only reason I want faster weapon switching is because it results in faster gameplay.
The simple fact that you actually think slow weapon switching is an element of "skill" is really telling of how fucking ridiculous you are as a player. Honestly.
>actually think slow weapon switching is an element of "skill"
Don't think anyone argues this to be the case, most people don't seem to agree with you that 'slow' weapon switching is an actual problem.
It's a "problem" because I know the weapon I want when I want it, and I don't like waiting around for the game to give it to me. It also allows for far more aggressive gameplay which is just more fun. It allows for shit like >>2730585.
Why would you want to hide more and shoot less just to select a weapon? Is that the time you need for your brain to catch up with the situation?
Slow weapon switching basically puts a skill cap on any given encounter and limits your creativity as a player. End result is less gameplay dynamics. It's much more fun to use all your weapons to their best potential on the fly than changing less just because the game itself is too slow for what you'd ideally like to do.
I like the setting more. Like a lot more.
It was also my first videogame my father bought me for my 6th birthday.
So yeah, Q2 because nostalgia.
Aren't we all nostalgianiggers after all /vr/?
>Quake 2 webms above
not the game's fault you play it like shit
>stopping to shoot
>rearing up for cover all the time
>little sense for weapon switching
>overall complete sissy-ass style of play
>"hurr it's because the guns don't switch fast enough"
>>"hurr it's because the guns don't switch fast enough"
More strawmanning. Beautiful.
Even if Q2 had fast weapon switching it would still be overly campy due to the abundance of hitscanners that don't flinch on Nightmare you shitheap. The slow weapon switching further slows this down.
Show me some speedruns of Quake 2 on Nightmare. I'll wait :)
Guys, I looked up a patch for the Steam version of Quake 2, and what I got was a pile of shit.
> Longer loading times
> Presented like a total hackjob
> No nearest neighbour interpolation
> Full screen mode doesn't work
> Awful particle effects
> Occasional crashes
Any suggestions? The ultimate Quake 1 patch was perfect. It's what I searched for for Quake 2 as well.
>Why would you want to hide more and shoot less just to select a weapon?
Pretense of realism? Slinging your rifle over your shoulder and pulling your pistol from your holster doesn't happen in 0 seconds.
I'm not saying there has to be a quicktime event for switching your weapon but the game showing my character rapidly putting my gun away for another one, at least tells me the devs cared.
Quake having no animation for this was probably a result of the game being retooled as a Doom clone at the last minute and them not bothering to put those animations in due to time constraints, Doom had an animation for that, as did all Quakes after 1, and every shooter ever since.
It's a very basic detail for FPS games and I don't see a reason to not have it if you can. You can remove it for speed, but then you might as well remove animations for opening doors or have elevators move in the blink of an eye, to make the game faster. Why have the final boss do a detailed death animation when he can just die instantly and then roll the credits?
Duke 3D could have done without the animation showing you scanning keycards to open doors, sure, but isn't it nice that it's there?
>Realism killed videogames
Yeah, if you go for realistic military shooters and if you're a bitter old cuck with rose tinted glasses.
You can have selective realism while still making shit fun, Half-Life and Duke Nukem 3D were praised in their day for their realism, but when you actually look at those games, they're fucking bizarre and off the walls with their shit.
Duke had quasi realistic things like the pistol reloading every 12th shot, buildings and streets which almost looked like they came out of real life, sort of, empty casings and shells would fly out of guns as you fired them, enemies would explode into showers of gore if you blew up bombs at them, toilets would flush if you pressed them (or if you were injured, you could take a leak for 10hp), you could smash toilets, urinals and fire hydrants to create sprays of water (which you could drink from for health if you needed to), you could blast bottles off shelves in bars, you could smash computers and television sets, you could blast garbage cans, you could shoot fire extinguishers to cause explosions, there were office chairs, mugs, cardboard boxes, lamps and other light-fixtures, potted plants, all which could be destroyed.
Yet Duke 3D had all the fucking insane shit: a shrink ray, which would allow you to step on enemies, a microwave ray which would swell an enemy up so they exploded, hurting anything nearby and showering the place in blood and chunks of flesh, a weapon which allows you to freeze enemies so you can shatter them, dual-wielded rapid firing mini-rocket launchers, a jetpack, police officers mutated into cruel pig-like creatures, a flying alien commander who shits explosive rockets.
Duke Nukem 3D was only slightly realistic in some aspects, in that it paid a lot of attention to detail, but overall it was a very spaced out and wacky game. If you think the very basic attention to detail of showing you switching weapons killed videogames, then you're a cantankerous fucking autist.
>Duke 3D could have done without the animation showing you scanning keycards to open doors, sure, but isn't it nice that it's there?
I would say yes, but that's more because Duke was a character and it fits rather than it being universally nice. Quake could easily live without it.
Haven't played Q2 for long, so I won't comment about weapon switch times in it specifically
Top kek. First of all, Duke Nukem 3D is hardly a game that went for 'realism' and saying that is batshit stupid. Also realism is okay but not when it comes at the expense of game mechanics. Duke Nukem for example was still running at a thousand miles per hour and was allowed to carry an entire arsenal on his back and had all the other goofy, non-realistic shit it came with. Duke Nukem 3D, a game that I love, is not one that I'd describe as being tainted by 'realism' you tit. I don't even know why you're bringing it up.
>If you think the very basic attention to detail of showing you switching weapons killed videogames, then you're a cantankerous fucking autist.
You people are amazingly stupid I gotta say. Some idiot got latched onto this one single aspect I pointed out of Q2 that was inferior to the first game and went full shithouse over it. I don't define every FPS solely by the speed at which it changes weapons. My three favourite officially released FPS campaigns of all time are Plutonia, Blood and Quake with Duke as an honourable mention. I can't really choose between them. Plutonia's weapon switching is slow but it has plenty of other great things going for it (very much unlike Quake 2). My single favourite FPS campaign of all time might even be Scythe 2, a fan made megawad of Doom II, and its weapon switching is obviously also slow.
Believe it or not I made a whole bunch of comparisons of Q2 to Quake including level design, speed, feel of movement, weapons, enemy dynamics, combat and other reasons why I find it's far inferior to the first game. For some reason you idiots have latched onto this one single thing like I define the entirety of my FPS landscape by it. What's more is you're getting crazy butthurt about it for some reason. It's honestly hilarious.