shihonage
Subscribe to my OnlyFans
Yes yes, your religious objections have been noted on a thousand different occasions.
Quake 4 is probably still the best-looking FPS that feels sufficiently old-school.
Quake 3 was good for what it set out to do. It just wasn't, well, Quake 3. Neither was Quake 2 or 4 for that matter. It's more like Quake, Strogg, id Arena and Strogg 2. Why id kept the name is beyond me. Marketing?Fuck Quake > 1.
I'm not particularly bitter about 3 but CBA to make an exception and I still prefer the UT.Quake 3 was good for what it set out to do. It just wasn't, well, Quake 3. Neither was Quake 2 or 4 for that matter. It's more like Quake, Strogg, id Arena and Strogg 2. Why id kept the name is beyond me. Marketing?Fuck Quake > 1.
I wouldn't say it's mazelike, but IIRC, Return to Castle Wolfenstein was nicely designed.
Quake 4 is probably still the best-looking FPS that feels sufficiently old-school.
Prey is superior in all accounts. Level Design, Weapon Design, Enemy Design, theme.
Heck, even the new DOOM seems more old-school that Quake IV, from the videos. I mean, it's better than Quake 2, but we are talking about Quake 2. Quake IV is a military shooter in the Doom3 engine, with some much-needed advances like vehicle sections to endure the drab design.
It's pretty, at least. Who the heck thought we needed plot in Quake?
I disagree. It was good, but it certainly wasn't the best, what with the back tracking (many id games suffer from this, but Q2 made it feel slower imo) and sometimes predictable enemy placements. Compared to some of the best levels in Doom 2 and Quake, it's just no contest. Crap I'm doing DraQ's job.Probably the apex of id software level design.
What about the first game? I bought it back then but it wouldn't run on my computer. Looked cool though.IGI-2 has some good (unlinear) level design. A very underrated game IMO.
What about the first game? I bought it back then but it wouldn't run on my computer. Looked cool though.IGI-2 has some good (unlinear) level design. A very underrated game IMO.
The first game is ok. From what I remember, it had a cool-looking terrain engine and most missions were pretty varied, but the devs decided to go full retard and introduce enemy respawn about halfway through the game, which was a pleasant surprise in a supposedly realistic shooter without mid-game saves.What about the first game? I bought it back then but it wouldn't run on my computer. Looked cool though.IGI-2 has some good (unlinear) level design. A very underrated game IMO.
The levels were usually huge outdoor areas with lots of empty terrain and an enemy base or two sprinkled around them. The levels were big mostly because it allowed for some extreme long-range sniping, and also because of the coolness factor (screw invisible walls), but most of it was there just for show. The focus was in infiltrating enemy bases, doing something and getting out. The levels were open-ended and usually allowed you to approach the bases from any direction, but they were certainly not something you could get lost in, as the bases weren't usually all that huge, and you had access to super accurate satellite maps and other technological tools. One notable problem with the level design was that it started to feel kind of the same after a while, as the game recycled the same buildings over and over again with minor changes, and the environment stayed pretty much the same as well, except for the weather conditions and the time of day. Still a very cool game and worth a play, but not necessarily what the OP is looking for. The closest comparison would probably be the Delta Force series, which also has huge maps and a somewhat similar approach to overall gameplay.What about the first game? I bought it back then but it wouldn't run on my computer. Looked cool though.
Yeah. I have no idea what they were thinking, because the respawns damn near ruin the game. Some enemies just respawn infinitely while others only respawn when an alarm is sounded, and it can and will lead to some pretty infuriating situations. You may take out an enemy guard with a sniper rifle from afar just to find out that the same guard is again standing there once you get inside the base. You may clear a room, exit it and then get immediately shot in the back by an enemy that didn't even exist five seconds earlier (it's especially fun when it happens twenty minutes into the mission). In one mission you need to escape a base without setting off the alarm (if that happens, the gates will close and you will have to go open them again), and on one playthrough I cleared the whole damn base about half-a-dozen times before I was able to get out — all without restarting the mission even once.From what I remember, it had a cool-looking terrain engine and most missions were pretty varied, but the devs decided to go full retard and introduce enemy respawn about halfway through the game, which was a pleasant surprise in a supposedly realistic shooter without mid-game saves.
That's what attracted me to it, I had played Delta Force and it looked similar.The closest comparison would probably be the Delta Force series, which also has huge maps and a somewhat similar approach to overall gameplay.
I would also like to recommend Dark Forces as well, simply for the fact I don't think it gets the attention it deserves. That game plays very handsomely, same goes for the more celebrated Dark Forces 2. Though DF2 has these hilariously odd light saber duels that don't really work. It's a bop-fest.Probably the apex of id software level design.
Try D2X-XL.I don't know if there's anything like a new interpreter for Descent that would make it visually more palatable, like we have for Doom .wads.
I finished it. Was pretty good.Also - BLAKE STONE! It's a shooter by Apogee running on the Wolf3D engine. In my experience, barely anyone has even heard about that one, while the game is pretty excellent.
I disagree. It was good, but it certainly wasn't the best, what with the back tracking (many id games suffer from this, but Q2 made it feel slower imo) and sometimes predictable enemy placements. Compared to some of the best levels in Doom 2 and Quake, it's just no contest.
Overload looks very promising http://store.steampowered.com/app/450220/Plenty of decent suggestions here. Its just sad that this breed of shooters has died out. Guess im a bit spoiled by the kickstarter era crpgs, cause hate them or love them, they definitely sparked some diversity into the genre. And i guess thats what this genre also needs badly.
Prey has gone full retard with its portal puzzles, committing the same crimes as Half-Life 2, i.e. killing the pacing. It was a largely front-loaded game that degraded into masturbatory mediocrity.
Quake 4 was no more drab-looking than D44M. In fact I prefer its visual style to D44M.
Quake 2 had monotonous visuals, but the actual level design in the campaign was consistently great to the end. Probably the apex of id software level design.
while Quake 2 campaign feels like a clear progression with gradually increasing difficulty curve and steadily introduced variety of enemies.
It also tries to have a narrative
The world of Quake 2 feels like it all fits together
For the lack of a better word, Quake 2 campaign feels "mature"
but Quake 2 backtracking seemed just perfect in length and "puzzliness" to me.